Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
SDR2014-00002
SDR2O14 - 00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS T I GARD (With 125-day extension) 120 DAYS = 6/23/2015 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: GREENBURG APARTMENTS CASE NOS.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2014-00002 Adjustment(VAR) VAR2014-00010 Adjustment (VAR) VAR2014-00011 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting site development review for seven three-story buildings, containing a 63 unit apartment complex with 23 garages on 1.57 acres. The site will be served by an access drive from SW Greenburg Road. The proposal also includes two adjustments: 1) an on-site parking adjustment from 100 required spaces to 94 spaces, a 6% reduction, and 2) an access spacing adjustment from 600 feet to approximately 100 feet along SW Greenburg, an arterial street. APPLICANT: Evergreen Builders,LLC c/o Joe Westerman 7420 SW Hunziker Road,Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 OWNER: Greenburg Road Apartments, LLC 7420 SW Hunziker Road, Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: 9550 SW Greenburg Road;WCTM 1S126DC,Tax Lot 00900 ZONE: MUE-1: mixed use employment. The MUE-1 and 2 zoning districts are designed to apply to areas where employment uses such as office, research and development and light manufacturing are concentrated. Commercial and retail support uses are allowed but are limited, and residential uses are permitted which are compatible with employment character of the area. MUE-1 is the high density mixed use employment district. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.630, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the proposed site development review, 6% on-site parking adjustment, and access spacing adjustment, subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI of this decision. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 1 OF 29 SDR201400002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY SITE WORK: The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher, 503-718-2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 1. Prior to commencing any site work, the project arborist shall perform a site inspection for tree protection measures, document compliance/non-compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the city manager or designee within one week of the site inspection. 2. The project arborist shall perform semimonthly (twice monthly) site inspections for tree protection measures during periods of active site development and construction, document compliance/non- compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the project planner within one week of the site inspection. 3. Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall submit to the city the current Inventory Data Collection fee for urban f restry plan implementation: 27 planted open grown trees (at $147 first + $28/each additional tree) =$147 + 728 = $875. 4. Prior to comm any.site work, the applicant shall provide a tree establishment bond that meets the requirements of Urban Forestry Manual Section 11,Part 2: 27 planted open grown trees x$441/tree = $11,907. 5. Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall submit revised building elevations that demonstrate that the required offsets are met. 6. Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall submit a revised dimensioned site plan that demonstrates the open space calculation meets the minimum requirements. Submit to the Engineering Department (Greg Berry, 503-718-2468 or greg@tigard-or.gov) for review and approval: 7. Prior to any work on site, the applicant's engineer shall submit a preliminary access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. 8. Prior to any work on site, the applicant shall submit the plan and profile location of the public storm drain and sanitary sewer proposed to serve the site and executed agreements for any required easements. 9. Prior to any work on site, the applicant shall obtain county approval of plans to construct improvements to Greenburg Road. 10. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, February 2003 edition (and any subsequent versions or updates)." 11. Prior to any ground disturbance on the site the applicant shall obtain an erosion control permit issued by the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS 468.740 and the Federal Clean Water Act. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 2 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Engineering Department (Greg Berry, 503-718-2468 or greg@tigard-or.gov) for review and approval: 12. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain approval from Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. 13. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Public Facility Improvement(PFI) permit is required for this project to cover street improvements,public utility issues, and any other work in the public right-of-way. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee". 14. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain all permits and service provider letters necessary from all appropriate agencies (such as Washington County, Tualatin Valley Water Department, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, and Clean Water Services) for all work to be done on site. 15. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain city and CWS approval of plans for the construction of the stormwater treatment facilities. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT: The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher, 503-718-2434. 16. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall cooperate with Tri-Met to design and build an improvement to the transit system most likely to serve the residents of the development and the ridership in the area. 17. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit the applicant shall call for a Planning Inspection to ensure the project is built according to the approved plans. Submit to the Engineering Department (Greg Berry, 503-718-2468 or greg@tigard-or.gov) for review and approval: 18. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall obtain city and CWS approval of the complete construction of the stormwater treatment facilities and maintenance plans. 19. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall obtain city approval of the complete construction of the proposed driveway. The applicant's engineer shall submit a final access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. 20. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall obtain county approval of constructed improvements to Greenburg Road. 21. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding overhead utilities. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 3 OF 29 SDR201400002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site Information and Proposal Description: The applicant is requesting site development review for a seven-building, containing a 63 unit apartment complex with 23 garages on 1.57 acres. The site will be served by an access drive from SW Greenburg Road. The proposal also includes two adjustments: 1) an on-site parking adjustment from 99 required spaces to 94 spaces, a five percent reduction, and 2) an access spacing adjustment from 600 feet to approximately 100 feet along SW Greenburg, an arterial street. Site History: The parcel is vacant. A search of City records found a site development review (SDR98-00020) that approved the construct of a 57 room hotel; this approval expired. No other land-use cases associated with the subject parcels were found. Vicinity Information: The site is zoned MUE-1. Properties to the north and south are zoned MUE-1, properties to the west are zoned MUC and properties to the east are within Washington County jurisdiction zoned residential. The area is primarily commercial and multifamily within the City of Tigard and single family neighborhoods within Washington County. The site is bordered by an apartment complex to the north, a church to the south, single-family dwellings on the east, and a Washington Square parking lot to the west. SECTION IV. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET A notice of a pending land use action was sent to neighboring property owners within 500 feet of the subject site boundaries and interested parties on October 30,2014. The City received three written comments. Charli Chambers is concerned that one access will be a fire hazard, left hand turns onto Greenburg will be dangerous, and the parking adjustment request will result in unacceptable off-site impacts to the neighborhood and adversely impact safety in the community. Daniel and Amanda Moll worry that if the requested parking adjustment were granted that it would lead to the use of the neighboring church property for off-site parking and that it would be in conflict with church use of the property. Pieter Braam commented that the plan's one access on Greenburg represents a fire hazard and will result in traffic conflicts, and is also concerned about off-site parking in the neighborhood. RESPONSE: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (John Wolfe, 503-259-1504) has reviewed the proposal and provided comments in an October 30, 2014 letter regarding requirements for fire sprinklers. In addition, Mr. Wolff conditionally approved the proposed plans for an alternate means of fire protection for the one-access site. The applicant has been conditioned to obtain approval from TVFR prior to issuance of building permits. Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation provided a comment letter dated December 30, 2014 including conditions of approval required prior to issuance of building permits and prior to occupancy. These conditions are included as conditions in this decision. These issues are addressed further under each relevant approval criteria,below. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA The following summarizes the criteria applicable to this decision in the order in which they are addressed: A. Applicable Development Standards 18.360 Site Development Review 19.370 Variances and Adjustments 18.520 Commercial zoning districts 18.630 Washington Square Regional Center Plan District 18.705 Access,Egress and Circulation 18.715 Density Computations NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 4 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.745 Landscaping and Screening 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage 18.765 Off-street parking and loading requirements 18.790 Urban Forestry Plan 18.795 Vision Clearance Areas 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards B. Impact Study SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 18.360 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 18.360.090 Approval Criteria The director shall make a fmding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions, or denying an application: A. Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title, including Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Standards; The following sections were found not to apply to the proposal: 18.360.090.B (Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment); 18.360.090.D (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between Adjoining Uses-Nonresidential development); 18.360.090.G (100-year floodplain); 18.360.090.H (Demarcation of Public, semi-public and private spaces for crime prevention-Nonresidential development); and 18.360.090.I (Crime prevention and safety- Nonresidential development). The following sections were discussed elsewhere in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.K (Landscaping); 18.360.090.L (Drainage); 18.360.090.M (Provision for the Disabled); and 18.360.090.N (All Provisions&Regulations of Underlying Zone Apply);Chapter 18.810,Street and Utility Standards. C. Exterior elevations. 1. Along the vertical face of single-family attached and multiple-family structures, offsets shall occur at a minimum of every 30 feet by providing any two of the following: a. Recesses,e.g., decks,patios,entrances, floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet; b. Extensions, e.g., decks, patios, entrances, floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet, a maximum length of an overhang shall be 25 feet; and c. Offsets or breaks in roof elevations of three or more feet in height. As shown in the Plan Set, the four apartment buildings on the south of the project meet the exterior elevation criterion on the front and back,but not sides,which are 40 feet long and undifferentiated. In addition, the three buildings along the northern property line do not include two of any offsets on their rear northern elevations. This standard is not met. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit revised building elevations that demonstrate that the required offsets are met. E. Private outdoor area—Multifamily use. 1. Private open space such as a patio or balcony shall be provided and shall be designed for the exclusive use of individual units and shall be at least 48 square feet in size with a minimum width dimension of four feet; and a. Balconies used for entrances or exits shall not be considered as open space except where such exits or entrances are for the sole use of the unit, and b. Required open space may include roofed or enclosed structures such as a recreation center or covered picnic area; 2. Wherever possible,private outdoor open spaces should be oriented toward the sun; and NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 5 OF 29 SDR2014100)2GREENBURG APARTMENTS 3. Private outdoor spaces shall be screened or designed to provide privacy for the users of the space. As shown on the plans and stated in the narrative, the first floor units have patios and the second and third floor units have balconies. The private outdoor spaces have a minimum dimension of 48 feet. The units along the south border will have their open space facing the sun; those along Greenburg Road will have morning sun. The ground floor patios will be screened to provide privacy while the upper floor balconies are designed to provide privacy. This standard is met. F. Shared outdoor recreation areas—Multifamily use. 1. In addition to the requirements of subsection E of this section, usable outdoor recreation space shall be provided in residential developments for the shared or common use of all the residents in the following amounts: a. Studio up to and including two-bedroom units, 200 square feet per unit; and b. Three or more bedroom units,300 square feet per unit. 2. The required recreation space may be provided as follows: a. It may be all outdoor space; or b. It may be part outdoor space and part indoor space; for example, an outdoor tennis court, and indoor recreation room; or c. It may be all public or common; or d. It may be part common space and part private; for example, it could be an outdoor tennis court, indoor recreation room and balconies on each unit; and e.Where balconies are added to units,the balconies shall not be less than 48 square feet. 3. Shared outdoor recreation space shall be readily observable to promote crime prevention and safety. The proposed 63 unit apartment complex will only have one and two bedroom units; therefore the required shared outdoor recreation area is 12,600 square feet (63 units x 200 square feet/unit). The Site Plan (Sheet 1) includes an Area Calculations Table showing 3,348 square feet for private outdoor space (63 units x 48 square feet = 3,024 square feet) and 9,785 square feet for public outdoor space for a total of 13,133 square feet of shared outdoor recreation area. The plans do not show how the public outdoor space calculation is obtained and, therefore, it cannot be determined if the shared outdoor recreation standard is met. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit a revised dimensioned site plan that demonstrates the shared open space calculation meets the minimum requirements. Tigard Police requested a detailed lighting plan to ensure reasonable and adequate steps to deter crime. The revised plan set includes a Site Lighting plan (Sheet 19) that shows foot-candle illumination across the site. This requirement is met. J. Public transit. 1. Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to or within 500 feet of existing or proposed transit route; 2. The requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: a. The location of other transit facilities in the area, and b. The size and type of the proposal; 3. The following facilities may be required after city and Tri-Met review: a. Bus stop shelters, b. Turnouts for buses, and c. Connecting paths to the shelters. The site is located on SW Greenburg Road which is served by two Tri-Met routes: Route 76 and 78. Transit stops for these two routes are both approximately 250 feet northwest of the site. There is also a transit stop 650 feet southwest of the site. Route 43 is available at Hall Blvd approximately 800 feet to the north. The Washington Square Transit Center is approximately 1,500 feet to the west. The proposal was routed to Tri-Met who commented that they would support a bench at any of the stops. The applicant agreed to work with Tri-Met to provide the most suitable improvement. Therefore, to support the applicant's request for a 5% parking reduction, the applicant shall cooperate with Tri-Met to design and build an improvement to the transit system most likely to serve the residents of the development and the ridership in the area. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 6 OF 29 SDR2O14-(N002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the proposal has not met all of the applicable site development review criteria.With the following conditions of approval,these criteria can be met. CONDITIONS: • The applicant shall submit revised building elevations that demonstrate that the required offsets are met. • The applicant shall submit a revised dimensioned site plan that demonstrates the open space calculation meets the minimum requirements. • The applicant shall cooperate with Tri-Met to design and build an improvement to the transit system most likely to serve the residents of the development and the ridership in the area. 18.370 VARIANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS 18.370.020 Adjustments C. Special adjustments 5. Adjustment to access and egress standards (Chapter 18.705). a. In all zoning districts where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to conform to code standards within a particular parcel, access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved, the director may grant an adjustment to the access requirements of Chapter 18.705 through a Type II procedure, as governed in Section 18.390.030, using approval criteria contained in subparagraph b of this paragraph 5. b. The Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment from the access requirements contained in Chapter 18.705, based on the following criteria: i. It is not possible to share access; ii. There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; iii. The access separation requirements cannot be met; iv. The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access; v. The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; and vi. The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. I8.705.030.H.3 requires a minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial to be 600 feet. SW Greenburg Rd is a county arterial street. SW Washington Square Drive and SW Summit (Gormartin) Lane intersections are about 425 feet apart.The access spacing standard cannot be met.No alternative access is available.According to the preliminary site distance report submitted by the applicant finds that the proposed access will be safe. The Street Improvement Plan (Sheet 6) shows a visual clearance triangle consistent with Chapter 18.795. The proposed driveway location for the subject development maximizes intersection separation along SW Greenburg. The applicable approval criteria are met.Therefore, the adjustment to the access spacing standard can be approved. 6. Adjustments to parking standards (Chapter 18.765). a. Reduction from minimum parking requirements. By means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, the director may authorize up to a 20% reduction in the total minimum vehicle parking spaces required in 18.765.070.H when an applicant for a development permit can demonstrate in a parking study prepared by a traffic consultant or in parking data from comparable sites that: i. Use of transit, demand management programs, and/or special characteristics of the customer, client employee or resident population will reduce expected vehicle use and parking space demand for this development, as compared to standards Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) vehicle trip generation rates and minimum city parking requirements; and According to TDC18.765, and shown in the applicant's narrative, 87 spaces for the 63 one and two bedroom apartments, plus 13 guest parking spaces for a total of 100 spaces, is required. The applicant proposes 94 parking NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 7 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS spaces and a 5%parking reduction,but a 6%parking space reduction (6 spaces) from a total of 100 spaces required. The application includes a transportation engineering report by Todd Mobley of Lancaster Engineering and an Addendum dated March 25, 2015. The Addendum demonstrates through analysis of peak demand of a similar adjacent multi-family development, the ITE comparison parking ratio, transit availability, and demand management provided by interior bicycle parking in 25% of the units that the 6% space reduction can be supported, in this case. This criterion is met. ii. A reduction in parking will not have an adverse impact on adjacent uses. The city received three public comments concerned about off-site impacts related to the parking reduction request. One comment from the adjacent neighbor to the south,who lives in the parish house associated with the Lutheran Church, cited the potential for parking conflicts on the church site,particularly if the guest parking required by code would be eliminated with approval of the adjustment request. FINDING: The applicant's parking study and Addendum provide enough information to show that the proposed reduction can be granted without adverse impact. The study cites the availability of transit in nearby Washington Square, private indoor and public outdoor bike parking on site, a high walkability score,and most importantly, the observed peak demand of a similar adjacent multi-family development, and the ITE comparison parking ratio to support the revised request for a 6%parking reduction. Therefore, the modest 6% parking reduction requested (of potentially 20% allowed) can be approved.This criterion is met. 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Table 18.520.1 includes a list of permitted, restricted, conditional and prohibited uses in commercial zones. In the MUE-1 zone, residential uses are permitted which are compatible with employment character of the area. Multifamily residential is permitted in the zone. The subject site is located in the MUE-1 zone, a high-density mixed use employment zoning district. Multifamily residential development is proposed. The proposed use is a permitted use in the zone. TABLE 18.520.2 outlines commercial development standards. The MUE-1 zoning district has the following dimensional requirements: TABLE 18.520.2 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS STANDARD MUE-1 [18] Proposed Minimum Lot Size None 68,481 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width None NA Minimum Setbacks Front yard 0 ft. [21] 10 ft. Side facing street on corner&through lots 0 ft. N/A Side yard 0 ft. 2-3 ft. Rear yard 0 ft. [20] 20 ft. Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district - - Distance between property line and front of garage N/A N/A Minimum Building Height 2 stories 3 stories Maximum Height 200 ft. 33 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 85% 84.1% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 15.9% Minimum FAR 1.25 N/A Minimum Residential Density [4] 50 units/acre 63 units Maximum Residential Density 141 None N/A [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [4]Notwithstanding the requirements of Section 18.715.02(1,minimum and maximum density shall be determined for residential only projects using the number of residential units per acre shown in the above table. [18]The requirements contained in the Buffer Matrices in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2 shall be used in calculating widths of buffering/screening and required improvements NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 8 OF 29 SDR2014-00002GREENBURG APARTMENTS to be installed between proposed uses in the MUC,MUE and MUR zones within the Washington Square Regional Center(WSRC)and abutting zoning districts not included within the WSRC,or zoning districts within the WSRC which are nut mixed-use.For MUC and MUE zones,the requirements for Commercial Zones apply.For MUR zones,the requirements for the Neighborhood Commercial Zone apply. 1201 Side and rear yard setbacks shall be 20 feet when the zone abuts residential districts shown in Section 18.510.020 except R-25 and R-40. 1211 The maximum setback is 20 feet. According to the applicant's Site Plan (Sheet 1), the proposed front, side and rear yard setbacks are met. All buildings are shown as three stories consistent with the two-story minimum. Site coverage does not exceed the maximum site coverage of 85%. As shown in the density calculation provided in section 18.715 below, the minimum density of 50 units/acre has been met with the proposed 63 units. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, development standards in the MUE-1 residential zone have been met. 18.630 WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER PLAN DISTRICT 18.630.010 Purpose and Applicability D. Development conformance. All new developments, including remodeling and renovation projects resulting in new non-single-family residential uses, are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the development and building codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Washington Square Regional Center. 18.630.050 Site Design Standards Compliance. All development must meet the following site design standards. If a parcel is one acre or larger a phased development plan may be approved demonstrating how these standards for the overall parcel can be met. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010.C.2, governing criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. The subject parcel is greater than one acre, but the applicant has not requested phasing development nor any variances. A. Building placement on major and minor arterials. 1. Purpose. Architecture helps define the character and quality of a street and can make a strong statement about the overall community and city at large. The placement and design of buildings provides the framework for the streetscape and defines the edges of the public right-of-way. Architecture and ground floor uses can activate the street, either by its design presence or by those who come and go from it. At intersections, investing in building frontages can create gateways and special places that add to the character of the area. 2. Standard. Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of all street frontages along major and minor arterial streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on major and minor arterial streets. As shown on the Site Plan (Sheet 1), the subject property has approximately 100 feet of frontage on SW Greenburg Rd., an arterial. The proposed building fronting SW Greenburg Rd. is 40 feet wide. However, access is obtained along this frontage,which is 30 feet wide. The building occupies 57%of the available frontage. This standard is met. B. Building setback. 1. Purpose. Buildings and investment in architecture is most conspicuous when it is visible from the street. The presence of buildings closely sited at the edge of the right-of-way creates an envelope for the street and a sense of permanence. 2. Standard. The minimum and maximum building setback from public street rights-of-way shall be in accordance with Table 18.520.2. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 9 OF 29 SDR2014 10002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS The minimum setback from SW Greenburg Rd. is 0 feet and the maximum is 20 feet. The applicant proposes a 10- foot setback.This standard is met. C. Front yard setback design. 1. Purpose. The front yard is the most conspicuous face of a building and requires special attention. Places for people and pedestrian movement helps create an active and safer street. Higher level of landscape anticipates a more immediate visual result. 2. Standard. For setbacks greater than 0 feet, landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to the applicable standard in subsection E of this section. Hard- surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per 18.52O.O4O.B and Table 18.520.2. The Landscape Plan (Sheet L1) shows a hardscape and landscaped front yard including five bike parking spaces. This standard is met. D.Walkway connection to building entrances. 1. Purpose. As density increases and employee and resident populations increase, it is expected that more people will move between businesses within the WSRC. Provisions should be made to encourage people to walk from business to business, and housing to business rather than use automobiles. 2. Standard. A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. This walkway must be at least six feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner adjacent to a public street intersection are required. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per 18.52O.04O.B and Table 18.520.2. As shown in the Site Plan (Sheet 1), six-foot walkways connect all building entrances with SW Greenburg Rd. This standard is met. E. Parking location and landscape design_ 1. Purpose. The emphasis on pedestrian access and a high quality streetscape experience requires that private parking lots that abut public streets should not be the predominant street feature. Where parking does abut public streets, high quality landscaping should screen parking from adjacent pedestrian areas. 2. Standard. Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. When buildings or phases are adjacent to more than one public street, primary street(s) shall be identified by the city where this requirement applies. In general, streets with higher functional classification will be identified as primary streets unless specific design or access factors favor another street. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50% of the primary street frontage. When abutting public streets, parking must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 parking lot screen standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is eight feet or is equal to the adjacent building setback, whichever is greater. All other site landscaping shall be landscaped to an L-2 general landscaping standard. The L-1 and L-2 standards are more fully described in Section 18.630.090. As show in the Landscape Plan (Sheet L1) the L-1 planting standard along Greenburg is met. 18.630.060 Building Design Standards All new buildings constructed in the MUC, MUE and MUR zones within the WSRC shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in 18.370.O10.C.2, criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. The applicant does not propose any variances. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 10 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 GREFNBURG APARTMENTS A. Ground floor windows. 1. Purpose. Blank walls along the street frontage tend to be neglected, and are not pedestrian friendly. Windows help keep "eyes on the street" which promotes safety and security, and can help create a lively street frontage by displaying activities and products within the building. Lighting at night from ground floor windows also adds to the presence of activity and the sense that someone is home. 2. Standard. All street-facing elevations within the building setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as the entire requirement is located at a building corner. As shown on the Elevations and Roof Plan (Sheet 12), the proposed elevation along Greenburg includes 53% in windows and openings. This standard is met. B. Building facades. 1. Purpose. Straight, continuous, unarticulated walls lack interest, character and personality. The standard provides minimum criteria for creating a diverse and interesting streetscape. 2. Standard. Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a building off-set of at least one foot; (c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection,such as an arcade; or (d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. The proposed building fronting Greenburg is 40 feet in length and is articulated with bay windows and an entry recess. This standard is met. C. Weather protection. 1. Purpose. Weather protection is encouraged to create a better year-round pedestrian environment and to provide incentive for people to walk rather than drive. 2. Standard. Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. As shown in the plan set all building entrances include weather protection. This standard is met. D. Building materials. 1. Purpose. High quality construction and building materials suggest a level of permanence and stature appropriate to a regional center. 2. Standard. Plain concrete block,plain concrete,corrugated metal,plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than two feet. As stated in the narrative, the proposed building materials will not include any of the listed prohibited materials. This standard is met. E. Roofs and roof lines. 1. Purpose. Roof line systems that blur the line between the roof and the walls of buildings should be avoided. This standard simply states that roofing materials should be used on the roof and that wall finish materials should be use on building walls. The premise is that future buildings in the WSRC should have a look of permanence and quality. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 11 OF 29 SDR2(114-0(X)02 GREIiNBURG APARTMENTS 2. Standard. Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. As stated in the narrative and shown in the plan set, the proposed building materials for roofs and walls are appropriate for those surfaces and will have the look of permanence and quality.This standard is met. F. Roof-mounted equipment. 1. Purpose. Roof top equipment, if not screened properly, can detract from views of adjacent properties. Also roofs and roof mounted equipment can be the predominant view where buildings are down slope from public streets. 2. Standard. All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. The applicant has not described where any roof mounted equipment might be sighted. In addition, the pitched roofs proposed do not lend themselves to roof mounted equipment. Any equipment would need to be screened. As proposed, and given the information provided,this standard is met. 18.630.090 Landscaping and Screening Applicable levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other subsections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. A. L-1 parking lot screen. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on public streets. The L-1 standard is in addition to other standards in other chapters of this title. The setback shall be a minimum of eight feet between the parking lot and a public street. L-1 trees shall be considered parking lot trees and spaced between 30 and 40 feet on center within the setback. All L-1 trees shall be a minimum of 3'/z-inch caliper at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a three-foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. B. L-2 general landscaping. The L-2 standard applies to all other trees and shrubs required by this chapter and Chapter 18.745 (except those required for the L-1 parking lot screen). For trees and shrubs required by Chapter 18.745, the L-2 standard is an additional standard.All L-2 trees shall be 2%-inch caliper at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. As shown in the Landscape Plan (Sheet L1), the L-1 and L-2 standards have been met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the applicable Washington Square Regional Center Plan District standards are met. 18.705 ACCESS. EGRESS.AND CIRCULATION 18.705.020 Applicability of Provisions A. When provisions apply. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures (see Section 18.360.050), and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. The proposal is a 63 unit site development; therefore these provisions apply. 18.705.030 General Provisions NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 12 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS D. Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in 18.705.030.H and I shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the city for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. A driveway directly connected to SW Greenburg Rd. will provide access to the site. This standard is met. F. Required walkway location. On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: 1. Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments. 2. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multifamily developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities. 3. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum six-inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum three-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. 4. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, other pervious paving surfaces, etc. Any pervious paving surface must be designed and maintained to remain well-drained. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. Each of the proposed residential buildings is connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities. Walkways connecting the trash enclosure are 6 feet in width, are concrete, and do not exceed 36 feet crossing the drive aisles. This standard is met. H. Access management. 1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the city and AASHTO (depending on jurisdiction of facility). A driveway along will provide access to the site. The application includes a preliminary sight distance analysis concluding that adequate sight distance is available at the site access. It appears that this standard can be met, but sight distance will need to be verified at final design and after construction to verify that no changes have been made or objects added that would obscure site distance. Prior to any work on site, the applicant's engineer shall submit a preliminary access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. Upon completion of the improvements, the applicant's engineer shall submit a final access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. The applicant shall obtain approval of this report prior to final inspection. 2. Driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 13 OF 29 SDRa11400002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from city engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The nearest collector or arterial street intersection with SW Greenburg Road is at Hall Blvd. The driveway is more than 150 feet from Hall Blvd. This standard is met. 3. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. 4. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. SW Greenburg Rd is a county arterial street requiring a minimum spacing of 600 feet. The SW Washington Square Drive and SW Summit (Gormartin) Lane intersections are about 425 feet apart. The proposed driveway location maximizes intersection separation. The applicant requested and adjustment to this standard, which has been approved in this decision in the findings for adjustments to street improvement standards, above. Therefore, this standard is met. I. Minimum access requirements for residential use. 1. Vehicular access and egress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwelling units on individual lots and multifamily residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Tables 18.705.1 and 18.705.2. TABLE 18.705.2 VEHICULAR ACCESS/EGRESS REQUIREMENTS: MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE Dwelling Units Min.Number of Min.Access Min. Pavement Width Driveways Required Width 1-2 1 15' 10' 3-19 1 30' 24' if two-way, 15' if one-way: curbs and 5'walkway required 20-49 1 30' 24'if two-way or 2 30' 15' if one-way: curbs and 5' walkway required 50-100 2 30' 24'curbs and 5'walkway required The applicant's traffic engineer has submitted a report concluding that only one access is feasible and that it will operate at an A level of service. The standard is met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the Access,Egress and Circulation standards are met. 18.715 DENSITY COMPUTATIONS 18.715.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to implement the comprehensive plan by establishing the criteria for determining the number of dwelling units permitted. 18.715.020 Density Calculation A. Definition of net development area. Net development area, in acres, shall be determined by subtracting the following land area(s) from the total site acres: 1.All sensitive land areas: NOTICE OF DECISION P1[3 i 14 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS a. Land within the 100-year floodplain, b. Land or slopes exceeding 25%, c. Drainage ways, and d. Wetlands, e. Optional: Significant tree groves or habitat areas, as designated on the City of Tigard "Significant Tree Grove Map" or"Significant Habitat Areas Map"; 2.All land dedicated to the public for park purposes; 3. All land dedicated for public rights-of-way. When actual information is not available, the following formulas may be used: a. Single-family development: allocate 20% of gross acreage, b. Multifamily development: allocate 15% of gross acreage or deduct the actual private drive area; 4.All land proposed for private streets; and 5. A lot of at least the size required by the applicable base zoning district, if an existing dwelling is to remain on the site. B. Calculating maximum number of residential units. To calculate the maximum number of residential units per net acre, divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum number of square feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning district. Table 18.520.2 shows the minimum number of residential units in the MUE-1 zone is 50 units/acre. There is no maximum.As shown in the following density computation, the minimum number of units required on a net buildable area of 1.24 acres is 62 units. The applicant proposes 63 units, one more than the minimum. Minimum Residential Density Calculation Buildable Land Area Gross Area (SF) 1.57 acres Subtractions 1. Sensitive Land Areas 0 2. Park Dedications 0 3. Public ROW/Actual Access MFR 0.33 (14,414 sq. ft.) 4. Private streets 0 Subtotal:Subtractions 0.33 Net Buildable Land Area 1.24 acres Minimum Residential Units Calculation Net Buildable Land Area 1.24 acres Minimum units/acre 50 units/acre Minimum Residential Units 62 units FINDING: According to the computation above, the applicant has met the minimum residential density requirement. This standard is met. 18.725 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMACE STANDARDS These standards require that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 (Performance Standards) regulates: Noise,visible emissions,vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the commercial zoning districts and the industrial park (IP) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 15 OF 29 SDR2014-00002GREENBURG APARTMENTS V emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340-21-015 and 340- 28-070) apply. Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. Odors. The emissions of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readily detectable at any point beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors (340-028-090) apply. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare,whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. FINDING: The proposal is for multi-family development, which is permitted within the MUE-1 zone. These Environmental Performance standards will apply to the apartments after construction and be subject to compliance with the applicable code enforcement provisions. 18.745 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 18.745.040 Street Trees A. Street trees shall be required as part of the approval process for Conditional Use (Type III), Downtown Design Review (Type II and III), Minor Land Partition (Type II), Planned Development (Type III), Site Development Review (Type II) and Subdivision (Type II and III) permits. B. The minimum number of required street trees shall be determined by dividing the linear amount of street frontage within or adjacent to the site (in feet) by 40 feet. When the result is a fraction, the minimum number of required street trees shall be determined by rounding to the nearest whole number. C. Street trees required by this section shall be planted according to the Street Tree Planting Standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. D. Street trees required by this section shall be provided adequate soil volumes according to the Street Tree Soil Volume Standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. E. Street trees required by this section shall be planted within the right of way whenever practicable according to the Street Tree Planting Standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. Street trees may be planted no more than 6 feet from the right of way according to the Street Tree Planting Standards in the Urban Forestry Manual when planting within the right of way is not practicable. F. An existing tree may be used to meet the street tree standards provided that: 1. The largest percentage of the tree trunk immediately above the trunk flare or root buttresses is either within the subject site or within the right of way immediately adjacent to the subject site; 2. The tree would be permitted as a street tree according to the Street Tree Planting and Soil Volume Standards in the Urban Forestry Manual if it were newly planted; and 3. The tree is shown as preserved in the Tree Preservation and Removal site plan (per 18.790.030.A.2), Tree Canopy Cover site plan (per 18.790.030.A.3) and Supplemental Report (per 18.790.030.A.4) of a concurrent urban forestry plan and is eligible for credit towards the effective tree canopy cover of the site. G. In cases where it is not practicable to provide the minimum number of required street trees, the Director may allow the applicant to remit payment into the Urban Forestry Fund for tree planting and early establishment in an amount equivalent to the City's cost to plant and maintain a street NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 16 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS tree for three (3) years (per the Street Tree Planting Standards in the Urban Forestry Manual) for each tree below the minimum required. The subject site has 100 feet of frontage along SW Greenburg Rd. Therefore, three street trees are required. The Landscape Plan (Sheet L1) shows three Brownhall Maple street trees located within the landscaped strip. This standard is met. 18.745.050 Buffering and Screening A. General provisions. 1. It is the intent that these requirements shall provide for privacy and protection and reduce or eliminate the adverse impacts of visual or noise pollution at a development site, without unduly interfering with the view from neighboring properties or jeopardizing the safety of pedestrians and vehicles. 2. Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2). The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the installation and effective maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abutting one another except for separation by a right-of-way,buffering, but not screening, shall be required as specified in the matrix. 3. In lieu of these standards, a detailed buffer area landscaping and screening plan may be submitted for the director's approval as an alternative to the buffer area landscaping and screening standards, provided it affords the same degree of buffering and screening as required by this code. Buffering and screening are required for the proposed project. Landscape Plans (Sheets L1-5) have been prepared by a registered Landscape Architect. The applicant proposes to meet the standards as required in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2. As shown on the Landscape Plan (Sheet L1), a 10-foot wide Type A buffer along SW Greenburg Rd., an arterial, and Option #3C along the east boundary adjacent to single-family dwellings, including a six foot wall, are proposed.This standard is met. B. Buffering and screening requirements. 1. A buffer consists of an area within a required setback adjacent to a property line and having a depth equal to the amount specified in the buffering and screening matrix and containing a length equal to the length of the property line of the abutting use or uses. 2. A buffer area may only be occupied by utilities, screening, sidewalks and bikeways, and landscaping. No buildings, accessways or parking areas shall be allowed in a buffet area except where an accessway has been approved by the city. 3.A fence, hedge or wall, or any combination of such elements,which are located in any yard is subject to the conditions and requirements of paragraph B.8 and subsection D of this section. 4. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of combinations for landscaping and screening as specified in Table 18.745.1. In addition, improvements shall meet the following specifications: a. At least one row of trees shall be planted. Trees shall be chosen from any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual (except the nuisance tree list) unless otherwise approved by the director and have a minimum caliper of 1-1/2 inches for deciduous trees and a minimum height of six feet for evergreen trees at the time of planting. Spacing for trees shall be as follows: i. Small stature or columnar trees shall be spaced no less than 15 feet on center and no greater than 20 feet on center. ii. Medium stature trees shall be spaced no less than 20 feet on center and no greater than 30 feet on center. iii. Large stature trees shall be spaced no less than 30 feet on center and no greater than 40 feet on center. b. In addition, at least 10 five-gallon shrubs or 20 one-gallon shrubs shall be planted for each 1,000 square feet of required buffer area. c. The remaining area shall be planted in lawn or other living ground cover. As shown on the Landscape Plan (Sheet L1), a 10-foot wide Type A buffer along SW Greenburg Rd., an arterial, and Option #3C along the east boundary adjacent to single-family dwellings including a six foot wall and NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 17 OF 29 SDR2014IXu)2GRF,ENBURG APARTMENTS landscaping are proposed. This standard is met. E. Screening: special provisions. 1. Screening and landscaping of parking and loading areas: a. Screening of parking and loading areas is required. In no cases shall nonconforming screening of parking and loading areas (i.e., nonconforming situation) be permitted to become any less conforming. Nonconforming screening of parking and loading areas shall be brought into conformance with the provisions of this chapter as part of the approval process for conditional use (Type III), downtown design review (Type II and III), planned development (Type III), and site development review (Type II) permits only. The specifications for this screening are as follows: i. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls and raised planters; ii. Landscape planters may be used to define or screen the appearance of off-street parking areas from the public right-of-way; iii. Materials to be installed should achieve a balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees; iv. All parking areas, including parking spaces and aisles, shall be required to achieve at least 30% tree canopy cover at maturity directly above the parking area in accordance with the parking lot tree canopy standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. As shown on the Landscape Plans (Sheet L1-5), the parking lot is screened from SW Greenburg Rd by an apartment building and a planting bed to I.-1 standards,a wall and landscaping screens the parking lot from the east, buildings and landscaping screen the parking field from the north and south. The Parking Lot Tree Canopy Plan (Sheet L3) demonstrates compliance with the parking lot tree canopy standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. This standard is met. 2. Screening of service facilities. Except for one-family and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or disposal area and service facilities such as gas meters and air conditioners which would otherwise be visible from a public street, customer or resident parking area, any public facility or any residential area shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall be contained within the screened area. The applicant's narrative states the screening of service facilities such as gas and electric meters and air conditioners will occur with landscaping and a wooden fence. The planning site inspection will verify that screening is provided prior to occupancy. This standard is met. 4. Screening of refuse containers. Except for one- and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or refuse collection area which would be visible from a public street, parking lot, residential or commercial area, or any public facility such as a school or park shall be screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall or evergreen hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area. As shown on the Site Street Improvement Plan (Sheet 6) and Landscape plans, the proposed refuse containers (2) will be screened by a concrete block wall and partially screened by landscaping. This standard is met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposal meets all of the applicable landscape and screening standards. 18.755 MIXED SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE STORAGE 18.755.010 Purpose and Applicability B. Applicability. The mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage standards shall apply to new multi-unit residential buildings containing five or more units and nonresidential construction that are NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 18 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS { subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition, for such uses. FINDING: The applicant proposes using the 'Waste Assessment" method provided for by Code Section 18.755.040.D. The 63-unit multi-family project will be served by two roughly 100 square foot covered trash and recycling enclosures conveniently located in the center and eastern portion of the site for use by all residents. The outdoor trash enclosures will be constructed of split-faced CMU block, with wood and metal accents. The application includes a provider letter from Waste Management—the franchised hauler serving the area of the site,which states that the plans for solid waste collection and recycling facilities are adequate. The mixed solid waste and recycling standards are met. 18.765 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS 18.765.030 General Provisions E. Visitor parking in multifamily residential developments. Multi-dwelling units with more than 10 required parking spaces shall provide an additional 15% of vehicle parking spaces above the minimum required for the use of guests of residents of the complex. These spaces shall be centrally located or distributed throughout the development. Required bicycle parking facilities shall also be centrally located within or evenly distributed throughout the development As shown in the Site Plan (Sheet 1), and discussed in the applicant's narrative, the proposal requires 87 parking spaces and 13 visitor parking spaces (87 x .15 = 13.05 = 13 spaces) for a total of 100 spaces. However, the applicant has provided 94 spaces on site and requested a 6% adjustment. As shown in the Adjustment section of this decision,above,the adjustment can be granted. Therefore, this standard is met, as adjusted. G. Disabled-accessible parking. All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the state building code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. As shown in the Site Plan (Sheet 1), the parking plan includes two required ADA spaces. Specific design standards are reviewed at the time of building permit. This standard is met. 18.765.040 General Design Standards B. Access drives. With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: 1. Access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; 2. The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 18.705, Access,Egress and Circulation; 3. Access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences,walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; 4. Access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; 5. Access drives shall be improved with an asphalt, concrete, or pervious paving surface. Any pervious paving surface must be designed and maintained to remain well-drained; and 6. Excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by 18.810.030.P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. As shown in the Site Plan (Sheet 1), the parking plan meets the general design standards. These standards are met. I. Parking lot striping. 1. Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and 2. All interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. NOTICE OI+DECISION PAGE 19 01,29 SDR201400002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS As shown in the Site Plan (Sheet 1), the parking plan shows the required parking lot striping. This standard is met. J. Wheel stops. Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. As shown in the Site Plan (Sheet 1), the parking plan includes wheel stops. This standard is met. N. Space and aisle dimensions. (Figure 18.765.1) As shown in the Site Plan (Sheet 1) proposed parking is consistent with the standards in Figured 18.765.1. The space and aisle dimensions are met. 18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards A. Location and access. With regard to the location and access to bicycle parking: 1. Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; 2. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles,landscape areas or pedestrian ways; 3. Outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; 4. Bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. B. Covered parking spaces. 1. When possible,bicycle parking facilities should be provided under cover. 2. Required bicycle parking for uses served by a parking structure must provide for covered bicycle parking unless the structure will be more than 100 feet from the primary entrance to the building, in which case, the uncovered bicycle parking may be provided closer to the building entrance. C. Design requirements. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: 1. The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; 2. Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground,wall or other structure; 3. Bicycle parking spaces shall be at least two and one-half feet by six feet long, and,when covered,with a vertical clearance of seven feet.An access aisle at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; 4. Each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; 5. Required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; 6.Areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. E. Minimum bicycle parking requirements. The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. Single-family residences and duplexes are excluded from the bicycle parking requirements. The director may reduce the number of required bicycle parking spaces by means of an adjustment to be reviewed through a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria contained in 18.370.020.C.5.e. The applicant's narrative and Site Plan (Sheet 1) provide for 40 bike parking spaces in eight locations in groups of five spaces each, which are located within 50 feet of building entrances. In addition, the applicant states 25% of units (16 units)will have indoor bicycle parking spaces. Per Table 18.765.2,32 spaces are required for a 63 unit development.The proposal meets the required number and the design specifications for required bike parking. This standard is met. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 20 OF 29 SDR201400002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS Table 18.765.2 includes the Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements for multi-family residential use. The proposal includes 3 one-bedroom units and 30 two-bedroom units requiring 100 off-street parking spaces. 33 one-bedroom units x 1.25 = 42 spaces 30 two-bedroom units x 1.5 = 45 spaces Guest spaces at 15%x 87 = 13 spaces Total required 100 spaces The applicant proposes 94 spaces and has requested a 6% parking space reduction to make up the difference as provided for in Section 18.370.020.C.7.a F. Reductions in minimum required vehicle parking. Reductions in the required number of vehicle parking spaces may be permitted as follows: 1. The director may reduce off-street vehicle parking spaces per subsection H of this section by up to 20% in new developments for the incorporation of transit-related facilities such as bus stops and pull-outs, bus shelters, transit-oriented developments and other transit-related development through a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria contained in 18.370.020.C.7.b. Applicants who qualify for this adjustment may also apply for further parking reductions per paragraph 2 of this subsection F. 2. The director may reduce the total required off-street vehicle parking spaces per subsection H of this section by up to a total of 20% by means of parking adjustment to be reviewed through a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,using approval criteria contained in 18.370.020.C.7.a. 3. The director is authorized to reduce up to 10% of existing required parking spaces at a conversion ratio of one parking space for each 100 square feet of transit facility for developments which incorporate transit- related facilities such as bus stops and pull-outs, bus shelters, transit-oriented development or other transit-related facilities through a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, using approval criteria contained in 18.370.020.C.7.c. FINDING: The applicant has requested an adjustment to the minimum required vehicle parking by 6%. The applicant has agreed and been conditioned to work with TriMet to incorporate transit—related improvements. Findings for the adjustment request are included above under the adjustments section of this decision. Staff concludes that the proposed reductions in the required number of vehicle parking spaces may be permitted and the adjustment can be granted. This standard is met. 18.790 URBAN FORESTRY PLAN 18.790.030 Urban Forestry Plan Requirements A. Urban forestry plan requirements. An urban forestry plan shall: 1. Be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect (the project landscape architect) or a person that is both a certified arborist and tree risk assessor (the project arborist), except for minor land partitions that can demonstrate compliance with effective tree canopy covet and soil volume requirements by planting street trees in open soil volumes only; An Urban Forestry Plan prepared/approved by a Landscape Architect,James A. Clark,has been provided. This standard is met. 2. Meet the tree preservation and removal site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual (UFM); A tree preservation and removal plan has not been submitted. There are trees on property adjacent to the subject site located along the property line. The Landscape Architect states that an existing chain link fence on the property line to the north, and new chain link fence along the other property lines will serve as tree protection for all off-site NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 21 OF 29 SDR20144MMM)2GREENBURG APARTMENTS trees. However,this method would not be sufficient as the drip lines of trees extend over the property lines.The tree preservation and removal standards have not been met.To meet this standard, the applicant shall submit a tree protection plan that shows tree protection fencing at the drip line of off-site trees and includes methods to protect them during construction, consistent with the Urban Forestry Manual. This standard is met. 3. Meet the tree canopy site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual; and An existing tree plan was provided that identifies the canopy of existing open grown trees. According to the supplemental report,no concerns regarding soil conditions were identified. The project arborist has signed the Urban Forestry site plan and attested that the plan meets the tree canopy site plan standards. This standard is met. 4. Meet the supplemental report standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. A supplemental report was prepared by the project Landscape Architect,James A. Clark,Western Design Group. The report includes the required inventory data for the existing open grown trees (UFM Section 10,Part 3, and Subsection D). However, protection measures, consisting of a 5 foot metal fence secured to the ground located along the dripline of preserved off-site trees,have not been shown on a tree protection plan. As submitted,the project meets the effective tree canopy in accordance with UFM Section 10,Part 3. Because the site is zoned MUE-1,the required effective tree canopy is 33% for the entire site and 30% for the parking lot. According to the supplemental report, the entire development site is 68,481 square feet (33% coverage= 22,598). As stated in the report and shown on the tree canopy plan,the qualifying mature tree canopy area provided is 46,440 square feet or 68%; this standard is met. According to the Preliminary Parking Lot Tree Canopy Plan (Sheet L3), the parking lot is 29,248 square feet with a total qualifying mature tree canopy of 18,908 square feet,or 64.9% (30% coverage = 8,774 sf.).The minimum 30% canopy for the parking lot is met. B. Tree canopy fee. If the supplemental report demonstrates that the applicable standard percent effective tree canopy cover will not be provided through any combination of tree planting or preservation for the overall development site (excluding streets) or that the 15% effective tree canopy cover will not be provided through any combination of tree planting or preservation for any individual lot or tract in the R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5 and R-7 districts (when the overall development site meets or exceeds the standard percent effective tree canopy cover), then the applicant shall provide the city a tree canopy fee according to the methodology outlined in the tree canopy fee calculation requirements in the Urban Forestry Manual. The site meets the canopy requirements;therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the urban forestry plan requirements are met. 18.790.060 Urban Forestry Plan Implementation C. Tree Establishment. The establishment of all trees shown to be planted in the tree canopy site plan (per 18.790.030 A.3) and supplemental report (per 18.790.030.A.4) of the previously approved urban forestry plan shall be guaranteed and required according to the tree establishment requirements in Section 11, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual. The applicant's proposal does not address tree establishment. Therefore,a condition of approval is added for the applicant to provide a tree establishment bond that meets the requirements of the Urban Forestry Manual Section 11,Part 2. D. Urban forest inventory. Spatial and species specific data shall be collected according to the urban forestry inventory requirements in the Urban Forestry Manual for each open grown tree and area of stand grown trees in the tree canopy site plan (per Section 18.790.030.A.3) and supplemental report (per Section 18.790.030.A.4) of a previously approved urban forestry plan. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 22 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS Section 11, Part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual states that prior to any ground disturbance work, the applicant shall provide a fee to cover the city's cost of collecting and processing the inventory data for the entire urban forestry plan. This can be met through a condition of approval. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the applicable urban forestry tree establishment and inventory standards can be met with the following conditions of approval. CONDITIONS: Prior to any ground disturbance work, the project arborist shall perform a site inspection for tree protection measures, document compliance/non-compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the city manager or designee within one week of the site inspection. The project arborist shall perform semimonthly (twice monthly) site inspections for tree protection measures during periods of active site development and construction, document compliance/non-compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the project planner within one week of the site inspection. Prior to any ground disturbance work, the applicant shall submit to the city the current Inventory Data Collection fee for urban forestry plan implementation: 27 planted open grown trees (at$147 first + $28/each additional tree) =$147 + $728 = $875. Prior to any ground disturbance work, the applicant shall provide a tree establishment bond that meets the requirements of Urban Forestry Manual Section 11, Part 2: 27 planted open grown trees x $441/tree = $11,907. 18.795 VISUAL CLEARANCE 18.795.030 Visual Clearance Requirements A. At corners. Except within the CBD zoning district a visual clearance area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to the intersection of two streets, a street and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a public or private street. B. Obstructions prohibited. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge,planting, fence,wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. FINDING: New apartment construction and landscaping adjacent to the access way will be required to meet the applicable visual clearance triangle area requirement. The Street Improvement plan (Sheet 6) shows the visual clearance areas where the private access way intersects with SW Greenburg Road. This standard is met. 18.810 STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS: 18.810.030 Streets A. Improvements. 1. No development shall occur unless the development has frontage or approved access to a public street 2. No development shall occur unless streets within the development meet the standards of this chapter 3. No development shall occur unless the streets adjacent to the development meet the standards of this chapter, provided, however, that a development may be approved if the adjacent street NOTICE 01+DECISION PAGE 23 OF 29 SDR2014-00002GREENBURG APARTMENTS does not meet the standards but half-street improvements meeting the standards of this title are constructed adjacent to the development. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030E requires an arterial street to have at least a 49-foot right-of-way width from centerline and 34-foot paved section (or as required by the county)with sidewalks 10-feet wide, street lights, storm drainage, and underground utilities. SW Greenburg Road is adjacent to the site. A 49-foot half-street section is required by Washington County, including any dedication and street improvements, and has been conditioned. No new streets are proposed. As conditioned,this standard is met. H. Street alignment and connections. 1. Full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. 2. All local, neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is considered precluded when it is not possible to redesign or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. 3. Proposed street or street extensions shall be located to provide direct access to existing or planned transit stops, commercial services, and other neighborhood facilities, such as schools, shopping areas and parks. 4. All developments should provide an internal network of connecting streets that provide short, direct travel routes and minimize travel distances within the development. Additional street connections in this area arc precluded by surrounding existing development. This standard is met. N. Grades and curves. 1. Grades shall not exceed 10% on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet); and 2. Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the city engineer. The existing grades along the Greenburg Road frontage are less than 10%. No grade changes are proposed. This standard is met. Section 18.810.030.CC Requires a traffic study for development proposals meeting certain criteria. The application includes an April 7, 2014, traffic study prepared by Todd Mobley, P.E. of Lancaster Engineering assessing the traffic impact on the surrounding streets and recommending any required mitigation. The study provided anticipated level of service, evaluation of crash history, address spacing and intersection sight distance analysis.This standard is met. 18.810.050 Easements A. Easements. Easements for sewers, drainage,water mains, electric lines or other public utilities shall be either dedicated or provided for in the deed restrictions, and where a development is traversed by a watercourse or drainageway, there shall be provided a stormwater easement or drainage right- of-way conforming substantially with the lines of the watercourse. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 24 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 CREENBURG APARTMENTS . r B. Utility easements. A property owner proposing a development shall make arrangements with the city, the applicable district, and each utility franchise for the provision and dedication of utility easements necessary to provide full services to the development. The city's standard width for public main line utility easements shall be 15 feet unless otherwise specified by the utility company, applicable district,or city engineer. The site is fully served by existing utilities. Applicant has stated that any required easements for utilities will be provided. This standard may be met by condition. 18.810.070 Sidewalks A. Sidewalks. All industrial streets and private streets shall have sidewalks meeting city standards along at least one side of the street. All other streets shall have sidewalks meeting city standards along both sides of the street. A development may be approved if an adjoining street has sidewalks on the side adjoining the development, even if no sidewalk exists on the other side of the street. B. Requirement of developers. 2. If there is an existing sidewalk on the same side of the street as the development within 300 feet of a development site in either direction, the sidewalk shall be extended from the site to meet the existing sidewalk, subject to rough proportionality (even if the sidewalk does not serve a neighborhood activity center). No additional sidewalks are required. 18.810.090 Sanitary Sewers A. Sewers required. Sanitary sewers shall be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existingmains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards r Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. B. Sewer plan approval. The city engineer shall approve all sanitary sewer plans and proposed systems prior to issuance of development permits involving sewer service. C. Over-sizing. Proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the comprehensive plan. An existing public sewer at the southeast corner of the site will serve the site. No other sewer or sewer extension is required. 18.810.100 Storm Drainage A. General provisions. The director and city engineer shall issue a development permit only where adequate provisions for stormwater and floodwater runoff have been made, and: 1.The storm water drainage system shall be separate and independent of any sanitary sewerage system; 2.Where possible, inlets shall be provided so surface water is not carried across any intersection or allowed to flood any street; and 3.Surface water drainage patterns shall be shown on every development proposal plan. The site will drain to catch basins in the parking lot and will be directed to a public storm line at the southeast corner of the site. Applicant has stated that any required easements will be shown on detailed utility plans. C. Accommodation of upstream drainage. A culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area,whether inside or outside the development, and the city engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). There is no upstream drainage. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 25 OF 29 SDR2OI4IX002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS D. Effect on downstream drainage. Where it is anticipated by the city engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the director and engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). Applicant's engineer has submitted preliminary detention calculations. This standard may be met by condition. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 07-20) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed in accordance with the CWS Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management and shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. An underground water quality facility is proposed. This standard may be met by condition. In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant's engineer has submitted preliminary detention calculations. This standard may be met by condition. 18.810.120 Utilities A. Underground utilities.All utility lines including, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: 1. The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; 2. The city reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; 3.All underground utilities,including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and 4. Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. C. Exception to undergrounding requirement. 1. The developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of undergrounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis.The most common,but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which undergrounding would result in the placement of additional poles,rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGI 26 OF 29 SOR2014IX0.02GREENBURG APARTMENTS 2. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay the fee in- lieu of undergrounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the opposite side of SW Greenburg Road. Payment of a fee in-lieu of undergrounding the utilities is required and estimated at$3,500. All new utilities serving the subject property shall be placed underground. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Fire and Life Safety: The applicant shall provide approval from Tualatin Valley Fire &Rescue (TVF&R) for access and hydrant location prior to any work on site. Public Water System: Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The application includes a service provider letter from TVWD stating that adequate capacity is available to provide service to the proposed development. Prior to any work on site the applicant shall provide documented approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) of the design of water service to the site. TVWD approval of construction shall be obtained prior to final inspection. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations,the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The applicant shall meet the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act regarding National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permits that may be needed for this project. The applicant shall follow all applicable requirements regarding erosion control,particularly those of the Federal Clean Water Act,State of Oregon,Clean Water Services,and City of Tigard including obtaining and abiding by the conditions of NPDES 1200-C or 1200-C-N permits as applicable. . Site Permit Requited: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer,storm, etc.) and driveway construction. This permit shall be obtained prior to any work on site and prior to issuance of the building permit. B. IMPACT STUDY SECTION 18.390.040.B.e requires that the applicant include an impact study. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system,and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication of real property interest, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. The applicant's narrative includes an impact study that addresses impacts of the proposed development on public facilities and services. The proposed development of 63 apartment units will add traffic impacts to the city. The county transportation system will be offset with frontage improvements to SW Greenburg Road as well as payment of the Transportation Development Tax. The applicant proposes to collect storm drainage from the site, detain and NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 27 OF 29 SDR22I11400002 GREP..NRURG APARTMENTS • treat it in an underground facility. A sewer line is available to the site. No negative noise impacts are anticipated from this residential development. In addition to the Transportation Development Tax, each new unit will be assessed a Parks Development Fee at issuance of building permits. ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY ANALYSIS The Transportation Development Tax (TDT) is a mitigation measure required for new development and will be paid at the time of building permits. Based on Washington County implementation figures for 2014/2015, TDTs are expected to recapture approximately 33.0 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Based on the use and the size of the use proposed and upon completion of this development, the future builders of the residences will be required to pay TDTs of approximately $331,191 ($5,257 x 63 new multi-family dwelling units. Based on the estimate that total TDT fees cover 33.0 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this project's traffic impact is $1,003,609 ($331,191 _ 0.33). The difference between the TDT paid and the full impact,is considered the unmitigated impact. FINDING: Using the above cost factors, an estimated total of $331,191 TDT is required, resulting in a net unmitigated impact of $672,418. Therefore, the required assessment is substantially less than the impacts of the proposed development. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City Police Department reviewed the proposal and has requested a detailed lighting plan to ensure reasonable and adequate steps to deter crime are considered. The City Public Works Department reviewed the proposal but did not provide comment. The City Development Review Engineer (Contact Greg Berry, 503-718-2468) has reviewed the proposal and provided comment in a Memorandum dated November 10, 2014,which can be found in the land use file and as an attachment to this decision. The findings and conclusions in the Memorandum have been incorporated into this land use decision. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation provided a comment letter dated December 30,2014 including conditions of approval required prior to issuance of building permits and prior to occupancy. These conditions are included as conditions in this decision. Tualatin Valley Water District (Stewart Davis) reviewed the proposal and determined that TVWD has capacity to serve the property from an 8-inch line in SW Greenburg Road. Clean Water Services (Jackie Sue Humphreys, 503-681-3600) has reviewed this proposal and issued a letter dated November 12, 2014 stating conditions to be met prior to any work on the site. In addition, a Sensitive Area Pre- Screening Site Assessment Letter (File No. 14-000384) finds that the project will not significantly impact the existing or potentially sensitive areas found near the site. Frontier reviewed the application and has no issue with it, except that one pole may have an issue. Portland General Electric reviewed the application and has not issue with it. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (John Wolfe,503-259-1504) has reviewed the proposal and provided comments in an October 30, 2014 letter regarding requirements for fire sprinklers. In addition, Mr. Wolff conditionally approved the proposed plans for an alternate means of fire protection for the one-access site. The applicant has been conditioned to obtain approval from TVFR prior to issuance of building permits. NONCE.OF DECISION PAGE 28 OF 29 SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS Attachments: Exhibit 1: Site Plan Exhibit 2: Zoning Map Exhibit 3: The City of Tigard Development Review Engineer Memo,dated November 10,2014 Exhibit 4: Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation,Letter dated December 30,2014 SECTION IX. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owners of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON MAY 15, 2015 AND EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 5, 2015 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. eal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Comthunity Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing,subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 4:00 PM ON JUNE 4, 2015. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,Oregon at (503) 639-417 / It 7 May 15,2015 PREPARED BY: ; Gary Pigenstecher DATE Associate Planner • May 15.2015 APPRO BY: om McGuire DATE Assistant Community Development Director NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 29 OF 29 SDR_MOi4-mol2GREENBURG APARTMENTS r 1_ `N . . .g11110;! 17-1 iii 1 4 ,0---___:L_______,R,RD ,, >laX i I E , : I .., . ,,HR.,.. II.. , 2.c ® / n ® . ,- 11.111Il0I1ll 1 1 / i • nm :is iltr 2 AI�;o;B D oP� ��. e,m� e to BUIT ,DF.RS GREENBURGRD. PelrxLctenemm�Nbteoa byte= at onebunf.�wr,rwexmermeeeof� ---- RW,cepesxnn or porn;Ie.r, a na/br eco Ix Ah. ene l0 Wonee Desial ly u l rave '\ 7� PLAN , &.d. x�c.o.,.m�bbl�w� Deco Ix n� �mnm.e.�.m�e DESIGN INC SITE i LA V Irsetlse be wet Omaubw beucem tell mfr.eon be rMneile for ell&mnuus toll nano n VclobNte efbccmw benwllee elWW voxume hm the 0meabrseodcmnmc at....bylMCAwtp COMMERCIAL•RESIDENTIAL REMODELING She,eswe meet be*it'd re'be en"W rob.?'"*p be pmemee mt Wmn Px c 9xexn s on 11123 NH MIDDLER E&ST.ST..PORORTLAND,OR 97220 _hatred War"miltedNemk ccYecL PHONE:(503)252.3453•PAIL;ISOM 252-3459 b 11 EMAIL: DI D&&&DESION®OMAIL.COM w Zoning Map . - %•%.•... -- -'---,. B E A V E 11 t r o N ll NEn Generalized Zoning Categories & -.....ol NI Legend yA(( et \' Ems Subject Site 140- O C .■ Zone Description D6DL�i QD S,OARCREST Residential -Mixed Use Residential go I', i NI 111 NEMixed Use Central Business District _,_R 41 Commercial I IIIMixed Use Employment �((�� iw_, . . au Industrial LA_ I �:� IIIParks and Recreation 1 M U R-2 t i -Washington County Zoning aDa! G Jo4 Dig _. , Overlay Zones Milli Historic nne DistrictevlOverlay / -� � Y/�Planned Development Overlay 1. I e... U r y� • � pG9V�°[� f3QMA R E r;3 ) 5 UU iEll ■ • C. BORDERS ST iii, t ._ 115.1111111 .■ it IIIM MA Nq0 I iifllfl I R-4.5 LEHMAN ST J Map P med:28-Oct-14 INFORMATION ON THIS MAP 5 FOR GENERAL LOCATION II, - y ONLY AND SHOULD ri VERIFIED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES_ I0 01111 DATA IS DERIVED FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES.THE CITY OF TIGARD / MAKES N,A CU RANTTI REPRESENTATION IOM COMPLETENESS NY OF THE MTI IIIIIII CONTENT,P H,.HEREIN TE CITY OF TIGARDSHAL OF ANYTHE 11J DATA PROVIDEDWARRAN WARRANTY. RESETATION ARINA AS TO MN NO .,"■■ LIE ABILITI'FOR ERRORS.OMISSIONSREGARDLE OR INACCURACIES IN TIRE Y�e.L / INFORMATION PROVIDED REGAROLERS OF HOW CAUSED H" CORAL ST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT a ti ■ -- "A Place to Call Home" N ,/ R 1 6 C� of Tlaa d 4.,-t /I . �, _ _ GA(�D QS 13125 SW Hall BlvdIliN 0 24 I PD) ' TI MA Tigard.OR 97223 E 503639-4171 nL;nluT R-1 I • wwwtcardor.co, Exhibit 3 111 City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum 0 • RS,1ef3.Y.5AVP1.4t aI.x4144A,:..«sfi:euS'AMIthaleb;ea, rc ,,www*.ea.E c.M•-sn. To: Agnes Kowacz, Associate Planner From: Greg Berry, Project Engineer Re: SDR 2014-02; Greenburg Apartments Date: November 10, 2014 Access Management (Section 18.705) Section 18.705.030.B requires site plans be presented for approval showing how access requirements are to be fulfilled in accordance with this chapter. The application includes a site and utility plan for a proposed 66 unit apartment complex. Section 18.705.030.D states that all vehicular access and egress ... shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. A driveway directly connected to SW Greenburg Rd. will provide access to the site. This standard is met. Section 18.705.F Required walkways PLANNING Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and/or AASHTO (depending on jurisdiction of facility). A driveway along will provide access to the site. The application includes a preliminary sight distance analysis concluding that adequate sight distance is available at the site access. It appears that this standard can be met, but sight distance will need to be verified at final design and after construction to verify that no changes have been made or objects added that would obscure Prior to any work on site, the applicant's engineer shall submit a preliminary access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by V meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. Upon completion of the improvements, the applicant's engineer shall submit a final access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. The applicant shall obtain approval of this report prior to final inspection. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The nearest collector or arterial street intersection is Hall Blvd. The driveway is more than 150 feet from Hall Blvd. so this standard is met. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. SW Greenburg Rd is a county arterial street requiring a minimum spacing of 600 feet. The SW Washington Square Drive and SW Summit (Gormartin) Lane intersections are about 425 feet apart. The proposed driveway location maximizes intersection separation. The standard is met. Section 18.705.030.I includes minimum access requirements for residential use. For multifamily use developments with 50 to 100 units, two accesses are required with a minimum paved width of 24 feet with curbs and a 5-foot sidewalk within a 30-foot width. The applicant's traffic engineer has submitted a report concluding that only one access is feasible and that it will operate at an A level of service. The standard is met. Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030E requires an arterial street to have at least a 49-foot right-of-way width from centerline and 34-foot paved section (or as required by the county) with sidewalks 10-feet wide, street lights, storm drainage, and underground utilities. No streets within the development are proposed. This standard is expected to be met. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.630.040 and 18.810.030.H.1 state that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required. Exceptions can be made where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Additional street connections in this area are precluded by surrounding existing development. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. The existing grades along the Greenburg Road frontage are less than 10%. No grade changes are proposed. This standard is met. Traffic Study: Section 18.810.030.CC Requires a traffic study for development proposals meeting certain criteria. The application includes an April 7, 2014, traffic study prepared by Todd Mobley,P.E. of Lancaster Engineering assessing the traffic impact on the surrounding streets and recommending any required mitigation. The study provided anticipated level of service, evaluation of crash history, address spacing and intersection sight distance analysis. This standard is met. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 2,000 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography,wetlands or other bodies of water or,pre-existing development or; • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. No blocks are proposed. Easements: Section 18.810.050 states that easements for sewers, drainage,water mains, electric lines, or other public utilities shall be either dedicated or provided for in the deed restrictions, and where a development is traversed by a watercourse or drainageway, there shall be provided a stormwater easement or drainage right-of-way conforming substantially with the lines of the watercourse. Section 18.810.050.B states that a property owner proposing a development shall make arrangements with the city, the applicable district, and each utility franchise for the provision and dedication of utility easements necessary to provide full services to the development. The city's standard width for mainline easements shall be 15 feet unless otherwise specified by the utility company, applicable district, or city engineer. The site is fully served by existing utilities. Applicant has stated that any required easements for utilities will be provided. This standard may be met by condition. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards along at least one side of private and industrial streets. No streets are proposed. This standard is met. Section 18.810.070.B states that if there is an existing sidewalk on the same side of the street as the development within 300 feet in either direction, the sidewalk shall be extended from the site to meet the existing sidewalk, subject to rough proportionality. No additional sidewalks are required. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. • Sewer Plan approval: Section 18.810.090.B requires that the applicant obtain City Engineer approval of all sanitary sewer plans and proposed systems prior to issuance of development permits involving sewer service. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. An existing public sewer at the southeast corner of the site will serve the site. No other sewer or sewer extension is required. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. The site will drain to catch basins in the parking lot and will be directed to a public storm line at the southeast corner of the site. Applicant has stated that any required easements will be shown on detailed utility plans. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area,whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There is no upstream drainage. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2007 and including any future revisions or amendments). Applicant's engineer has submitted preliminary detention calculations. This standard may be met by condition. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 07-20) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed in accordance with the CWS Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management and shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. An underground water quality facility is proposed. This standard may be met by condition. In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces of more than 1,000 square feet provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek,the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention, but a fee-in-lieu would be required. The applicant's engineer has submitted preliminary detention calculations. This standard may be met by condition. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the opposite side of SW Greenburg Road. Payment of a fee in-lieu of undergrounding the utilities is required and estimated at$3,500. Fire and Life Safety: The applicant shall provide approval from Tualatin Valley Fire &Rescue (TVF&R) for access and hydrant location prior to any work on site. Public Water System: Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The application includes a service provider letter from TVWD stating that adequate capacity is available to provide service to the proposed development. Prior to any work on site the applicant shall provide documented approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) of the design of water service to the site. TVWD approval of construction shall be obtained prior to final inspection. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction,grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The applicant shall meet the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act regarding National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permits that may be needed for this project. The applicant shall follow all applicable requirements regarding erosion control, particularly those of the Federal Clean Water Act, State of Oregon, Clean Water Services, and City of Tigard including obtaining and abiding by the conditions of NPDES 1200-C or 1200-C-N permits as applicable. . Site Permit Required: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and driveway construction. This permit shall be obtained prior to any work on site and prior to issuance of the building permit. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ANY WORK ON SITE: Submit to the Engineering Department (Greg Berry, 503-718-2468 or greg@tigard-or.gov) for review and approval: Prior to issuance of building permits, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover street improvements, public utility issues, and any other work in the public right-of-way. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee". Prior to any work on site, the applicant's engineer shall submit a preliminary access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. Prior to any work on site,the applicant shall submit the plan and profile location of the public storm drain and sanitary sewer proposed to serve the site and executed agreements for any required easements. Prior to any work on site,the applicant shall obtain county approval of plans to construct improvements to Greenburg Road. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual,February 2003 edition (and any subsequent versions or updates)." Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain all permits and service provider letters necessary from all appropriate agencies (such as Washington County, Tualatin Valley Water Department and Clean Water Services) for all work to be done on site. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain approval from Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. Prior to any ground disturbance on the site the applicant shall obtain an erosion control permit issued by the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS 468.740 and the Federal Clean Water Act. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain city and CWS approval of plans for the construction of the stormwater treatment facilities. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Greg Berry, 503-718-2468 or greg@tigard-or.gov) for review and approval: Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall obtain city and CWS approval of the complete construction of the stormwater treatment facilities and maintenance plans. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall obtain city approval of the complete construction of the proposed driveway. The applicant's engineer shall submit a final access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit,the applicant shall obtain county approval of constructed improvements to Greenburg Road. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding overhead utilities. I:\ENG\Development Engineering\Greenberg\9560 Greenberg Apartments\RJR 14-00002 Comments Greenberg Apts.docs Exhibit 4 iliftWASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON Department of Land Use and Transportation,Operations&Maintenance Division Vt 1400 SW Walnut Street,MS 51,Hillsboro,Oregon 97123-5625 (503)846-7623 FAX:(503)846-7620 December 30, 2014 Gary Pagenstecher City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 No. of pages: 5 RE: Greenburg Apartments City File Number: (SDR) 2014-00002 County File Number: CD-44/CP-45 Tax Map and Lot Number: 1S1-26DC00900 Location: 9550 SW Greenburg Road I., .+l.wr ill it I f r rn t r -i r L, 1 f y� ¢, j drr - µ; :11-11 , -..4044464 1, "4 . J• ". Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation has reviewed this development application and submits the following comments and required conditions for access to SW Greenburg Road, a County-maintained Arterial (5 Lanes). 1. The applicant is requesting approval of a 66-unit apartment complex with access to SW Greenburg Road. The minimum access spacing standard for SW Greenburg Road is 600 feet, measured between access points on each side of the road as required by Resolution and Order 86-95 (R&O 86-95) and Section 501-8.5.B of the Community Development Code. The proposed access to SW Greenburg Road does not meet this spacing standard. In compliance with R&O 86-95, the applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed access to SW Greenburg Road. Based on the information included in the report, the proposed access will not require additional traffic mitigation measures and can be expected to operate safely. To City Casefile(SDR)2014-0002 Page 1 of 5 implement the County's access-spacing standards, the applicant will be required to record a motor vehicle access restriction along the site's entire SW Greenburg Road frontage. 2. Resolution and Order 86-95 requires a minimum sight distance (measured in feet) equal to ten times the vehicular speed of the road(s) at proposed access location(s). This requirement applies to sight distance in both directions at each access. Before the County will permit access to SW Greenburg Road, the applicant will be required to provide certification from a registered professional engineer that adequate sight distance exists in both directions (or can be obtained pursuant to specific improvements) prior commencing onsite construction activities. 3. Consistent with statewide pedestrian circulation/linkage goals of the Transportation Planning Rule and the County's R&O 86-95 (road safety requirements), the County normally requires sidewalk installation as a minimum road safety improvement along site frontage of all County-maintained roads. Sidewalks further establish future street profiles, demarcate County or City right-of-way, and address drainage issues. Sidewalk requirements are not generally waived, even when sidewalk is not currently present on neighboring properties. Rather, even non-contiguous sidewalk is considered to provide some measure of pedestrian refuge and ideally, makes possible eventual connection of sidewalks (as surrounding development takes place and is likewise conditioned to provide sidewalk). Additionally, the Washington County Road Design and Construction Standards require provision of adequate drainage along a site's frontage of a county road. Sidewalks and drainage exist along the site's frontage of SW Greenburg Road however the improvements are not to current County standards identified in the Washington County Transportation System Plan and Road Design Standards. The applicant is required to construct the half-street improvement to include a 6' bike lane, gutter, curb, 6'sidewalk and a 5'foot planter strip with street trees to County Road Design/Construction Standards. Staff notes the existing pavement may be required to be reconstructed to the centerline of SW Greenburg Road. 4. The statewide Transportation Planning Rule requires provision for adequate transportation facilities in order for development to occur. Accordingly, the County has classified roads and road segments within the County system based upon their function. The current Transportation Plan (regularly updated) contains adequate right-of-way, road width and lane provision standards based upon each roadway's classification. Subject right of way is considered deficient if half-width of the existing right of way does not meet that determined necessary within the County's current transportation plan. The applicant is required to dedicate additional right-of-way to provide 49 feet from centerline of SW Greenburg Road. NOTE:All private signage and improvements are required to be located outside of the dedicated ROW. City Casefile(SDR) 2014-0002 Page 2 of 5 5. ILLUMINATION- Resolution and Order No. 86-95 requires access points on collectors and arterials to be adequately illuminated. To meet this requirement, a public street light will have to be installed at the proposed site access to SW Greenburg Road (Contact Ed Anderson — 503.846.7956). 6. Washington County requires submittal of an Access Report when estimated daily trip generation of a project and existing traffic levels on the adjacent County road exceed given limits as determined by R&O 86-95. Washington County Traffic Engineering staff reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis (Lancaster Engineering — April 7, 2014 & December 23, 2014) submitted for this development proposal as required by R&O 86-95. Based on the results included in the report, additional traffic mitigation on County-maintained roads is not warranted at this time. REQUIRED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Refer to the following link to access Washington County Road Design and Construction Standards: htto://www.co.west rinoton.or.us/LUT/Divisions/Engineering/ConsultentResources/road-design-standards.cfm PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT BY THE CITY OF TIGARD: A. The following shall be recorded with Washington County (Contact Scott Young, Survey Division: 846-7933): 1. Dedication of additional right-of-way to provide 49 feet from the centerline of SW Greenburg Road. 2. Provision of a non-access reservation along SW Greenburg Road frontage except at the access approved in conjunction with this application. B. Submit to Washington County Public Assurance Staff, 503-846-3843: 1. Completed "Design Option" form. 2. $3,735.00 Administration Deposit. NOTE: The Administration Deposit is a cost-recovery account used to pay for County services provided to the developer, including plan review and approval, field inspections, as-built approval, and project administration. The Administration Deposit amount noted above is an estimate of what it will cost to provide these services. if, during the course of the project, the Administration Deposit account is running low, additional funds will be requested to cover the estimated time left on the project(at then-current rates per the adopted Washington County Fee Schedule). If there are any unspent funds at project close out, they will be refunded to the applicant. /Inv point of contact with County staff can be a charcyeable cost. If p101ect plans are not complete or do not City Casefile(SDR)2014-0002 Page 3 of 5 • comply with County standards and codes, costs will be higher. Them is a charge to cover the cos! of every field inspection. Costs for enforcement actions will also be charged to the applicant. 3. A copy of the City's Land Use Approval with Conditions, signed and dated. 4. Preliminary certification of adequate sight distance for each access point to SW Greenburg Road, in accordance with County Code, prepared and stamped by a registered professional engineer, as well as: a. A detailed list of improvements necessary to produce adequate intersection sight distance (refer to the following webpage for sight distance certification submittal requirements). hilpa/www co.wastiinp ton .or.uslL UT/DivisionslC urrentnanning/development-application-forms.cfm 5. Three (3) sets of complete engineering plans for construction of the following public improvements: a. Construction of a half-street improvement (existing lane configuration to remain the same) to include a 6' bike lane with 2' buffer, gutter, curb, 6' sidewalk separated by a 5' planter strip to County Standards. Reconstruction of the existing pavement to the centerline of SW Greenburg Road may be required. Street trees shall be installed at intervals required by the City of Tigard. b. Access to SW Greenburg Road to County standards. c. Improvements within the right-of-way as necessary to provide adequate intersection sight distance at SW Greenburg Road access point. d. Closure of all existing driveways to SW Greenburg Road, other than the access approved by Washington County under the current land use application. e. Installation of illumination at the site's access to SW Greenburg Road to County Standards. C. Obtain a Washington County Facility Permit upon completion of the following: 1. Obtain Engineering Division approval and provide a financial assurance for the construction of the public improvements listed in conditions 1.13.5. NOTE: The Public Assurance staff(503-846-3843) will send the required forms to the applicant's representative after submittal and approval of items listed under I.B. The Facility Permit allows construction work within County rights-of-way and permits site access only after the developer first submits plans and obtains Washington County Engineering approval, obtains required grading and erosion control permits, and satisfies various other requirements of Washington County's Assurances Section including but not limited to execution of financial and contractual agreements. This process ensures that City Casefile(SDR)2014-0002 Page 4 of 5 t A the developer accepts responsibility for construction of public improvements, and that improvements are closely monitored, inspected, and built to standard in a timely manner. Access will only be permitted under the required Washington County Facility Permit, and only following submittal and County acceptance of all materials required under the facility permit process. 2. Provide evidence that documents reflecting required provisions under I.A. have been recorded. II. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY: Obtain a Finaled Washington County Facility Permit, contingent upon the following: A. The road improvements required in condition I.B.S. above shall be completed and accepted by Washington County. B. Upon completion of necessary improvements, submit final certification of adequate sight distance in accordance with County Code, prepared and stamped by a registered professional engineer. Requirements identified within this letter are considered by the County to be minimum warranted improvements (and/or analyses) that are necessitated by the proposed development, therefore it is requested that they be conveyed to the applicant within the City's Approval document. Please send a copy of the subsequent Final City Notice of Decision and any appeal information to the County. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions, please contact me at 503-846-7639. \i' ,' , ,--,._,.. * Qs,. Naomi Vogel Associate Plano r Cc: Rob Saxton,P.E.-Road&Bridge Engineering Services Paul Seitz,Assurances Section Transportation File City Casefile(SDR)2014-0002 Page 5 of 5 I. City of Tigard i I G A R D REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DA I L: October 30. 2014 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Agnes Kowacz.Associate Planner Phone: (503) 718-2427 Fax: (503) 718-2748 Email: agneskna,tigard-or.gov SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR)2014-00002/ ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2014-00010/ 2014-00011 - GREENBURG APARTMENTS - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a site development review for a 66 unit apartment complex,with 23 garages,located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road. The site will be served by an access drive from SW Greenburg Road. The proposal also includes two adjustments. The first adjustment is to the parking standards for a nine percent reduction of off-site parking requirements. The second adjustment is to the access standards. LOCATION: The property is located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road.The site is on the east side of SW Greenburg Road and within the Washington Square Regional Center.Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 1S126DC,Tax Lot 00900. ZONE: MUE-1: The MUE-1 and 2 zoning district is designed to apply to areas where employment uses such as office,research and development and light manufacturing are concentrated. Commercial and retail support uses are allowed but are limited, and residential uses are permitted which are compatible with employment character of the area. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment-1. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.360, Site Development Review; 18.370, Variances and Adjustments; 18.390, Procedures; 18.520, Commercial Zoning Districts; 18.705, Access Egress and Circulation; 18.725, Environmental Performance Standards; 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste; 18.765, Off-Street Parking and Loading; 18.780, Signs;18.790,Urban Forestry;18.795,Visual Clearance;18.810,Street and Utility Improvement Standards. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement/Plans for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: FRIDAY,NOVEMBER 14,2014. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you arc unable to respond by the above date,please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. — — Please contact of our office. — Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: — Name&Number of Person(s) Commenting: • CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FILE NOS: FILE NAME: 91712201 -6Gbo2- 6reevilkfielA-ipm-f-rnen-t9 ✓ Place a checkmark in the block to the left of the name of each person or organization that needs to be notified. CITY OFFICES C.D.Administration/Kenny Asher,CD Director C.D.Administration/Tom McGuire,Asst CD Director City Administration/Carol Krager,City Recorder Development Services/Planning-Engineering Techs. Development Services/Development Eng.Greg Berry(Copy on all Notices of Decision) << Building Division/Mark VanDomelen,Building Official /)( Police Department/Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer(Copy on all Notices of Decision) Public Works/John Goodrich,Interim Asst PW Director Public Works/Karleen Aichele,Engineer Tech 1 Hearings Officer(2 sets) Planning Commission(12 sets) City Attorney File/Reference (2 sets) LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS City of Beaverton,Planning Manager,POB 4755,Beaverton OR 97076* City of Beaverton,Steven Sparks,Dev Svcs Mgr,POB 4755,Beaverton OR 97076* City of Durham City Manager,17160 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd,Durham OR 97224. City of King City City Manager,15300 SW 116th Ave,King City OR 97224* City of Lake Oswego,Planning Director,POB 369,Lake Oswego OR 97034* City of Portland,Planning Bureau Director,1900 SW 4th Ave,Suite 4100,Portland OR 97201 City of Tualatin Planning Manager,18880 SW Martinazzi Ave,Tualatin OR 97062* Metro-Land Use and Planning,600 NE Grand Ave,Portland OR 97232-2736,Joanna Mensher,Data Resource Center (ZCA-Adopted)* Metro-Land Use and Planning,600 NE Grand Ave,Portland OR 97232-2736,Paulette Copperstone,(ZCA-RFC Only)' Metro-Land Use and Planning,600 NE Grand Ave,Portland OR 97232-2736,O.Gerald Uba,PhD, (CPA/DCA/ZON)* ODOT,Rail Division,Dave Lanning,Sr.Crossing Safety Specialist,555 13th Street NE,Suite 3,Salem OR 97301-4179 (Notify if ODOT R/R-Hwy Crossing is only access to land) ODOT,Region 1 -Development Review Coordinator Carl Torland,Right-of-Way Section,123 NE Flanders,Portland OR 97209-4037 (Vacations)* ri ODOT Region 1 Development Review Program,123 NW Flanders St,Portland OR 97209 OR Dept of Energy,Bonneville Power Administration,Routing ITRC-Attn: Renae Ferrera,POB 3621,Portland OR 97208-3621 (powerlines in area) OR Dept of Aviation,Tom Highland,Planning,3040 25th Street,SE,Salem OR 97310(monopole towers) OR Dept of Environmental Quality(DEQ),Regional Administrator,2020 SW Fourth Ave,Suite 400,Portland OR 97201- 4987 OR Dept of Fish&Wildlife,Elizabeth Ruther,Habitat Biologist,North Willamette Watershed District,18330 NW Sauvie Island Road,Portland OR 97231 OR Dept of Geo.&Mineral Ind., 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 965,Portland OR 97232 OR Dept of Land Conservation&Dev.,Mara Ulloa,635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150,Salem OR 97301-2540(Comp Plan Amendments&Measure 37)-Per 11/18/13 email from John Floyd-you have the option to send email copies See DLCD website for online submittal procedures OR Division of State Lands,Melinda Wood(WLUN Form Required),775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100,Salem OR 97301 _1279 Per 08/07/13 email from Cheryl Caines-docs should be emailed/do not send hard copies I/CURPLN/MASTERS/REO FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST(UPDATED 10/14/14) Page 1 of 2 CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS OR Parks and Rec Dept State Historic Preservation Office,725 Sumner St NE,Suite C,Salem OR 97301 (Notify if property has HD overlay) OR Public Utilities Commission,PO Box 1088,Salem OR 97308-1088 US Army Corps of Engineers,Kathryn Harris,Routing CENWP-OP-G,POB 2946,Portland OR 97208-2946(Maps and CWS letter only) Washington County Consolidated Communications Agency(WCCCA) "911",Dave .\ustin,POB 6375,Beaverton OR 97007-0375(monopole towers) X Washington County,Dept of Land Use&Trans,Naomi Vogel-Beattie,1400 SW Walnut St MS 51 Hillsboro OR 97123- 5625 (general apps)* Washington County,Dept of Land Use&Trans,Brent Curtis,155 N First Ave,Suite 350,MS 13,Hillsboro OR 97124 (CPA)* Washington County,Dept of Land Use&Trans,Assessment&Taxation, 155 N First Ave,Suite 350,MS 9,Hillsboro OR 97124(ZCA)* Washington County,Dept of Land Use&Trans,Doria Mateja,Cartography,155 N First Ave,Suite 350,MS 14,Hillsboro OR 97124(ZCA)* UTILITY PROVIDERS,SPECIAL DISTRICTS&AGENCIES Beaverton School District#48,Jennifer Garland,Demographics, 16550 SW Merlo Rd,Beaverton OR 97006-5152 ✓ Century Link,Right-of-Way Department,Qwest Corporation dba Century Link QC, NE 64th St,4th Floor,Seattle /c WA 98115 Century Link,Attn: John Pfeifer,1600 7th Ave,4th Floor,Seattle,WA 98191-0000(proposed and approved Annexation notices) Century Link,Karen Stewart,Local Government Affairs Director,310 SW Park Ave,Portland OR 97205(proposed and approved Annexation notices) Clean Water Services,Development Services Department,David Schweitzer/SWM Program,2550 SW Hillsboro Hwy, Hillsboro OR 97123* Comcast Cable Corp.,Gerald Backhaus,14200 SW Brigadoon Court,Beaverton OR 97005 (See map for area contact)NO MAP? ...Joe Patton Metro Area Communications Commission(MACC),Fred Christ,15201 NW Greenbrier Parkway,C-1,Beaverton OR 97006-4886 (annexations only) NW Natural Gas Company,Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord.,220 SW Second Ave,Portland OR 97209-3991 W Natural Gas Company,Account Services,ATTN: Annexation Coordinator 220 SW Second Ave,Portland OR 97209- 3991 (Annexations only) - Portland General Electric,Lorraine Katz,2213 SW 153rd Drive,Beaverton OR 97006 Portland General Electric,Tod L.Shattuck,2213 SW 153rd Drive,Beaverton OR 97006 Portland Western R/R,Burlington Northern/Sante Fe R/R,Oregon Electric R/R,(Burlington,Northern/Sante Fe R/R predecessor),Bruce Carswell,President and GM,200 Hawthorne Ave SE,Suite C320,Salem OR 97301-5294 Union Pacific Railroad,Director of Public Affairs,301 NE 2nd Ave,Portland OR 97232(currently the PA Dir is Brock Nelson,503-249-3079) /S Tigard/Tualatin School District#23J,Ter Brady,Administrative Offices,6960 SW Sandburg St,Tigard OR 97223-8039 Tigard Water District,POB 230281,Portland OR 97281-0281 Tualatin Hills Parks and Rec District,Planning Mgr,15707 SW Walker Rd,Beaverton OR 97006* i/ Tualatin Valley Fire&Rescue,John Wolff,DeputyFire Marshall,11945 SW 70th Ave,Tigard OR 97223-9196* X Tualatin Valley Water District,Administrative Office, 1850 SW 170th Ave,Beaverton OR 97006* Tri-Met Transit Development,Ben Baldwin,Project Planner,1800 SW 1st Ave#300,Portland,OR 97201 (If project is within 1/4 mile of a transit route) Vcrizon,John Cousineau,OSP Network,4155 SW Cedar Hills Blvd,Beaverton OR 97005 *Indicates automatic notification in compliance with intergovernmental agreement if within 500'of the subject property for any/all city projects (Project Planner is Responsible for Indicating Parties to Notify*) This document is password protected. Please see Joe or Doreen if you need updates to it or rim the eorresponding mailing,Ids Is aI 1/CURPLN/Reyucst for Comments Notification Labels.Thank you. I/CURPLNIMASTERS/REO FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION UST(UPDATED 10/14114) Page 2 of 2 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC August 4,2014 John Wolff Deputy Fire Marshall II Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue 11945 SW 70th Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 SUBJECT: AM&M Proposal for the Greenburg Road Apartments AM&M Request Number 1 Site Design Review,Case File SDR2014-00002 Mr. Wolff, In accordance with OFC D106 of the 2010 Oregon Fire Code, Evergreen Builders, LLC. Is requesting an alternate means of fire protection for the proposed apartment complex detailed below.This is in response to the email dated July 21, 2014 sent from John Wolff of TVF&R to Agnes Kowacz of the City of Tigard.The email references Fire Department access and fire apparatus turnaround for the Greenburg Road Apartments submitted under City of Tigard case File Number SDR2014-00002. Project Information TUA ATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE APPROVED n Project: Greenburg Road Apartments CONDITIONALLY APPROVED 19--- 9550 SW Greenburg Rd. APPROVAL OF PLANS IS NOT AN APPROVAL OF OMISSIONS OR OVERSIGHTS. Tigard, OR 97223 SEE CND R fse-ze i DATE 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard,OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC Owner: Joe Westerman, Evergreen Builders, LLC 7420 SW Hunziker Rd.,Suite D Tigard,OR 97223 Contact: Daryl Retzlaff,Evergreen Builders, LLC Project Manager (503) 680-0045 daryl@jmwproperties.com PROPOSAL The proposed property is located in the City of Tigard, in Washington County.The property is bordered by a 100 foot frontage to the west along Greenburg Road,an apartment complex to the North,single family residences to the east and a church to the South.The property is roughly 480'deep. The configuration of the property prohibits compliance with the requirement of having a secondary means of access for fire department vehicles(OFC D106.1).The property is land locked on three sides with no available route for a secondary access.The narrow frontage on Greenburg does not allow enough room for multiple accesses. Based on our meeting with John Wolff of TVF&R on July 22, 2014, Evergreen Builders would like to propose the following alternate means and methods not currently shown on the site plan: 1. Construct a 20 foot wide dead-end fire apparatus access road turnaround as detailed in OFC D103.1 and as shown on the revised site plan. (attached) 2. Install two fire hydrants in locations shown on the revised site plan per OFC 507.5.1 and table C105.1. 3. Upgrade proposed NFPA 13R system to a full NFPA 13 system at the recommendation of TVF&R and per OFC D106.1 exception. JUSTIFICATION The addition of the fire apparatus turn around would bring the site into compliance with OFC 503.2.5, and the added fire hydrants would be installed and spaced per OFC Appendix C table C105.1.Hydrants would be installed within 100'of fire department connections on all buildings with the exception of the building on the east of the property which would be about 105'. In addition,the automatic fire sprinkler 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC system would be upgraded to a full NFPA 13 system that would help to suppress any fire until adequate numbers of emergency personnel arrive at the site. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Thank you for considering our proposal.We feel that the items outlined above address the items of concern that were brought to our attention by TVF&R and discussed in the above referenced meeting. Attached is a revised site plan detailing our proposed changes. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding this AM&M proposal. Thank you Daryl Retzlaff Evergreen Builders 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 Agnes Kowacz From: Wolff, John F. <John.Wolff@tvfr.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 9:02 AM To: daryl@jmwproperties.com Cc: Agnes Kowacz Subject: Greenburg Apts Attachments: City of Tigard Greenburg Apts.pdf Daryl, It was nice to meet with you today. Attached are TVF&R comments surrounding the Greenburg Apts. Project for your records. John Wolff I Deputy Fire Marshal II Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Direct: 503-259-1504 www.tvfr.com i Agnes Kowacz From: Wolff, John F. <John.Wolff@tvfr.com> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 11:04 AM To: Agnes Kowacz Cc: Dan Nelson Subject: Greenburg Apts Agnes, I apologize for the delay in my review of the Greenburg Apts. Don't release this as complete yet! I am working on this as they fail to meet one or more very important criteria that has caused a delay in my response as I am researching alternative methods that we could accept. 1. No fire dept. turn around has been provided (or at least shown) on the plans submitted. 2. They are required to provide a secondary means of access as the structures are proposed to be 3-stories in height. This could be a deal killer so this is what I am researching. Dan, I believe they are planning to install 13-R auto sprinkler system throughout? We may be able to accept a single access if they were to upgrade the system to include the attic spaces. Would we want to require a full 13? What other solution could you suggest. John Wolff I Deputy Fire Marshal II Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Direct: 503-259-1504 www.tvfr.com 1 • www.tvJr.com Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue 6) REMOTENESS: Where two access roads are required,they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. (OFC D104.3) 7) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet(12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory buildings),and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide,"NO PARKING"signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 28 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide,"NO PARKING"signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more, parking is not restricted. (OFC 503.2.) The fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided. 8) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS WITH FIRE HYDRANTS: Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road,the minimum road width shall be 26 feet. (OFC D103.1) 9) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking"signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Roads 26 feet wide or less shall be posted on both sides as a fire lane. Roads more than 26 feet wide to 32 feet wide shall be posted on one side as a fire lane. Signs shall read"NO PARKING- FIRE LANE"and shall be installed with a clear space above grade level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have red letters on a white reflective background.(OFC D103.6) 10) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load)and 60,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight).You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. (OFC D102.1) 11) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 28 feet and 48 feet respectively,measured from the same center point. (OFC 503.2.4& 103.3) 12) PAINTED CURBS: Where required,fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted red and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE"at approved intervals. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. Lettering shall be white on red background.(OFC 503.3) 13) GRADE: Fire apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed 10 percent. Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maximum 5%)with the exception of crowning for water run-off. When fire sprinklers are installed, a maximum grade of 15% may be allowed. The approval of fire sprinklers as an alternate shall be accomplished in accordance with the provisions of ORS 455.610(5). (OFC 503.2.7& D103.2) 14) GATES: Gates securing fire apparatus roads shall comply with all of the following: Minimum unobstructed width shall be 16 feet,or two 10 foot sections with a center post or island. Gates serving one-or two-family dwellings shall be a minimum of 12 feet in width. Gates shall be set back at minimum of 30 feet from the intersecting roadway. Gates shall be of the swinging or sliding type. Manual operation shall be capable by one person. Electric automatic gates shall be equipped with a means for operation by fire department personnel. Locking devices shall be approved. Electric automatic gates shall comply with ASTM 220-5 and UL 325. (OFC D103.6) Removable bollards are not an approved alternate to a swinging gate. 15) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS-REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute(GPM)or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi, whichever is less as calculated using IFC, Appendix B. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. (OFC B105.3) Please provide a current fire flow test of the Page 12 • www.tvfr.corn r p. Tualatin Valley Fire& Rescue nearest fire hydrant demonstrating available flow at 20 psi residual pressure as well as fire flow calculation worksheets. Please forward copies to both TVF&R as well as your water purveyor. Fire flow calculation worksheets as well as instructions are available on our web site at www.tvfr.com. 16) FIRE HYDRANTS—COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: Where a portion of the building is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. This distance may be increased to 600 feet for buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. (OFC 507.5.1) 17) FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C,Table C 105.1. Considerations for placing fire hydrants may be as follows: • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected with fire sprinklers may contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants unless approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highways or freeways shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Heavily traveled collector streets only as approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the fire code official. 18) PRIVATE FIRE HYDRANTS: To distinguish private fire hydrants from public fire hydrants, private fire hydrants shall be painted red. (OFC 507.2.1, NFPA 24& 291) 19) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (OFC C102.1) 20) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly. (OFC 510.1) 21) PHYSICAL PROTECTION: Where fire hydrants are subject to impact by a motor vehicle, guard posts, bollards or other approved means of protection shall be provided. (OFC 507.5.6) 22) CLEAR SPACE AROUND FIRE HYDRANTS: A 3 foot clear space shall be provided around the circumference of fire hydrants. (OFC 507.5.5) 23) FIRE HYDRANT/FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet of a fire department connection(FDC). Fire hydrants and FDCs shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway and or drive aisle. FDCs shall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code official. Fire sprinkler FDCs shall be plumbed to the fire sprinkler riser downstream of all control valves. Each FDC shall be equipped with a metal sign with 1 inch raised letters and shall read, "AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS OR STANDPIPES"or a combination there of as applicable. (OFC 912.2) 24) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. (OFC 1410.1 & 1412.1) 25) $JJOX BOX: A Knox Box for building access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an order form and instructions regarding installation and placement. (OFC 506.1) Page 13 . . 1 www.tvfr.corn Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue 26) pREMISES IDENTIFICATION: Buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Address numbers shall be Arabic numerals or alphabet numbers. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches high with a '/ inch stroke. (OFC 505.1) 27) FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS TO EQUIPMENT: Fire protection equipment shall be identified in an approved manner. Rooms containing controls for HVAC, fire sprinklers risers and valves or other fire detection, suppression or control features shall be identified with approved signs. (OFC 509.1) 28) ANGLE OF APPROACH AND DEPARTURE: The angles of approach and departure for fire apparatus roads shall not exceed 8 Degrees. (OFC 503.2.8, NFPA 1901) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS; The above listed criteria are preliminary potential applicable conditions that MAY apply to this project, If you have questions or need further clarification, please feel free to contact me at 503-259-1504. Sincerely, /�� � (/U.o�C p�r John Wolff Deputy Fire Marshal Copy: TVF&R File Page 14 • Exhibit 3 • 41 City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Agnes Kowacz, Associate Planner From: Greg Berry, Project Engineer Re: SDR 2014-02; Greenburg Apartments Date: November 10, 2014 Access Management (Section 18.705) Section 18.705.030.E requires site plans be presented for approval showing how access requirements are to be fulfilled in accordance with this chapter. The application includes a site and utility plan for a proposed 66 unit apartment complex. Section 18.705.030.D states that all vehicular access and egress ... shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. A driveway directly connected to SW Greenburg Rd. will provide access to the site. This standard is met. Section 18.705.F Required walkways PLANNING Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and/or AASHTO (depending on jurisdiction of facility). A driveway along will provide access to the site. The application includes a preliminary sight distance analysis concluding that adequate sight distance is available at the site access. It appears that this standard can be met, but sight distance will need to be verified at final design and after construction to verify that no changes have been made or objects added that would obscure Prior to any work on site, the applicant's engineer shall submit a preliminary access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by ✓ meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. Upon completion of the improvements, the applicant's engineer shall submit a final access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. The applicant shall obtain approval of this report prior to final inspection. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The nearest collector or arterial street intersection is Hall Blvd. The driveway is more than 150 feet from Hall Blvd. so this standard is met. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. SW Greenburg Rd is a county arterial street requiring a minimum spacing of 600 feet. The SW Washington Square Drive and SW Summit (Gormartin) Lane intersections are about 425 feet apart. The proposed driveway location maximizes intersection separation. The standard is met. Section 18.705.030.I includes minimum access requirements for residential use. For multifamily use developments with 50 to 100 units,two accesses are required with a minimum paved width of 24 feet with curbs and a 5-foot sidewalk within a 30-foot width. The applicant's traffic engineer has submitted a report concluding that only one access is feasible and that it will operate at an A level of service. The standard is met. Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030E requires an arterial street to have at least a 49-foot right-of-way width from centerline and 34-foot paved section (or as required by the county) with sidewalks 10-feet wide, street lights, storm drainage, and underground utilities. No streets within the development are proposed. This standard is expected to be met. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.630.040 and 18.810.030.H.1 state that full street connections with spacing of no mote than 530 feet between connections is required. Exceptions can be made where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Additional street connections in this area are precluded by surrounding existing development. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. The existing grades along the Greenburg Road frontage are less than 10%. No grade changes are proposed. This standard is met. Traffic Study: Section 18.810.030.CC Requires a traffic study for development proposals meeting certain criteria. The application includes an April 7, 2014, traffic study prepared by Todd Mobley,P.E. of Lancaster Engineering assessing the traffic impact on the surrounding streets and recommending any required mitigation. The study provided anticipated level of service, evaluation of crash history, address spacing and intersection sight distance analysis. This standard is met. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 2,000 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography,wetlands or other bodies of water or,pre-existing development or, • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. No blocks are proposed. Easements: Section 18.810.050 states that easements for sewers, drainage, water mains, electric lines, or other public utilities shall be either dedicated or provided for in the deed restrictions, and where a development is traversed by a watercourse or drainageway, there shall be provided a stormwater easement or drainage right-of-way conforming substantially with the lines of the watercourse. Section 18.810.050.B states that a property owner proposing a development shall make arrangements with the city, the applicable district, and each utility franchise for the provision and dedication of utility easements necessary to provide full services to the development. The city's standard width for mainline easements shall be 15 feet unless otherwise specified by the utility company, applicable district, or city engineer. The site is fully served by existing utilities. Applicant has stated that any required easements for utilities will be provided. This standard may be met by condition. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to mcct City design standards along at least one side of private and industrial streets. No streets are proposed. This standard is met. Section 18.810.070.B states that if there is an existing sidewalk on the same side of the street as the development within 300 feet in either direction, the sidewalk shall be extended from the site to meet the existing sidewalk, subject to rough proportionality. No additional sidewalks are required. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. • Sewer Plan approval: Section 18.810.090.B requires that the applicant obtain City Engineer approval of all sanitary sewer plans and proposed systems prior to issuance of development permits involving sewer service. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. An existing public sewer at the southeast corner of the site will serve the site. No other sewer or sewer extension is required. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. The site will drain to catch basins in the parking lot and will be directed to a public storm line at the southeast corner of the site. Applicant has stated that any required easements will be shown on detailed utility plans. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area,whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There is no upstream drainage. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2007 and including any future revisions or amendments). Applicant's engineer has submitted preliminary detention calculations. This standard may be met by condition. Storm Water Ouality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management(SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 07-20)which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed in accordance with the CWS Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management and shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. An underground water quality facility is proposed. This standard may be met by condition. In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces of more than 1,000 square feet provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention, but a fee-in-lieu would be required. The applicant's engineer has submitted preliminary detention calculations. This standard may be met by condition. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the opposite side of SW Greenburg Road. Payment of a fee in-lieu of undergrounding the utilities is required and estimated at $3,500. Fire and Life Safety: The applicant shall provide approval from Tualatin Valley Fire& Rescue (TVF&R) for access and hydrant location prior to any work on site. Public Water System: Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The application includes a service provider letter from TVWD stating that adequate capacity is available to provide service to the proposed development. Prior to any work on site the applicant shall provide documented approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) of the design of water service to the site. TVWD approval of construction shall be obtained prior to final inspection. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The applicant shall meet the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act regarding National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permits that may be needed for this project. The applicant shall follow all applicable requirements regarding erosion control, particularly those of the Federal Clean Water Act, State of Oregon, Clean Water Services, and City of Tigard including obtaining and abiding by the conditions of NPDES 1200-C or 1200-C-N permits as applicable. . Site Permit Required: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and driveway construction. This permit shall be obtained prior to any work on site and prior to issuance of the building permit. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ANY WORK ON SITE: Submit to the Engineering Department (Greg Berry, 503-718-2468 or greg@tigard-or.gov) for review and approval: Prior to issuance of building permits, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover street improvements, public utility issues, and any other work in the public right-of-way. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee". Prior to any work on site, the applicant's engineer shall submit a preliminary access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. Prior to any work on site, the applicant shall submit the plan and profile location of the public storm drain and sanitary sewer proposed to serve the site and executed agreements for any required easements. Prior to any work on site, the applicant shall obtain county approval of plans to construct improvements to Greenburg Road. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual,February 2003 edition (and any subsequent versions or updates)." Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain all permits and service provider letters necessary from all appropriate agencies (such as Washington County, Tualatin Valley Water Department and Clean Water Services) for all work to be done on site. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain approval from Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. Prior to any ground disturbance on the site the applicant shall obtain an erosion control permit issued by the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS 468.740 and the Federal Clean Water Act. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain city and CWS approval of plans for the construction of the stormwater treatment facilities. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Greg Berry, 503-718-2468 or greg@tigard-or.gov) for review and approval: Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall obtain city and CWS approval of the complete construction of the stormwater treatment facilities and maintenance plans. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall obtain city approval of the complete construction of the proposed driveway. The applicant's engineer shall submit a final access report to City engineering staff which verifies design of driveways and streets to be used by site traffic are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by the City and AASHTO. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall obtain county approval of constructed improvements to Greenburg Road. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding overhead utilities. I:\ENG\Development Engineering\Greenburg\9560 Greenburg Apartments\SDR 14-00002 Comments Greenburg Apts.docx WASHINGTON OUNTY, OREGON p .. Department of Lend Use end Transportation,Operations&Maintenance Division 411111% (51400)SW WalnutFAX. 3) 51-Hillsboro,Oregon 97123 5625 (503)846-7623 FAX:(503)646-7620 December 30, 2014 Gary Pagenstecher City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 No. of pages: 5 RE: Greenburg Apartments City File Number: (SDR) 2014-00002 County File Number: CD-441CP-45 Tax Map and Lot Number: 1S1-26DC00900 Location: 9550 SW Greenburg Road r...„ . Ivy l f•ltt #q' a f 4 . .. 1 N:,?, 41 rs + 4 a Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation has reviewed this development application and submits the following comments and required conditions for access to SW Greenburg Road, a County-maintained Arterial (5 Lanes). 1. The applicant is requesting approval of a 66-unit apartment complex with access to SW Greenburg Road. The minimum access spacing standard for SW Greenburg Road is 600 feet, measured between access points on each side of the road as required by Resolution and Order 86-95 (R&O 86-95) and Section 501-8.5.B of the Community Development Code. The proposed access to SW Greenburg Road does not meet this spacing standard. In compliance with R&O 86-95, the applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed access to SW Greenburg Road. Based on the information included in the report, the proposed access will not require additional traffic mitigation measures and can be expected to operate safely. To City Casefile(SDR)2014-0002 Page 1 of 5 implement the County's access-spacing standards, the applicant will be required to record a motor vehicle access restriction along the site's entire SW Greenburg Road frontage. 2. Resolution and Order 86-95 requires a minimum sight distance (measured in feet) equal to ten times the vehicular speed of the road(s) at proposed access location(s). This requirement applies to sight distance in both directions at each access. Before the County will permit access to SW Greenburg Road, the applicant will be required to provide certification from a registered professional engineer that adequate sight distance exists in both directions (or can be obtained pursuant to specific improvements)prior commencing onsite construction activities. 3. Consistent with statewide pedestrian circulation/linkage goals of the Transportation Planning Rule and the County's R&O 86-95 (road safety requirements), the County normally requires sidewalk installation as a minimum road safety improvement along site frontage of all County-maintained roads. Sidewalks further establish future street profiles, demarcate County or City right-of-way, and address drainage issues. Sidewalk requirements are not generally waived, even when sidewalk is not currently present on neighboring properties. Rather, even non-contiguous sidewalk is considered to provide some measure of pedestrian refuge and ideally, makes possible eventual connection of sidewalks (as surrounding development takes place and is likewise conditioned to provide sidewalk). Additionally, the Washington County Road Design and Construction Standards require provision of adequate drainage along a site's frontage of a county road. Sidewalks and drainage exist along the site's frontage of SW Greenburg Road however the improvements are not to current County standards identified in the Washington County Transportation System Plan and Road Design Standards. The applicant is required to construct the half-street improvement to include a 6' bike lane, gutter, curb, 6'sidewalk and a 5'foot planter strip with street trees to County Road Design/Construction Standards. Staff notes the existing pavement may be required to be reconstructed to the centerline of SW Greenburg Road. 4. The statewide Transportation Planning Rule requires provision for adequate transportation facilities in order for development to occur. Accordingly, the County has classified roads and road segments within the County system based upon their function. The current Transportation Plan (regularly updated) contains adequate right-of-way, road width and lane provision standards based upon each roadway's classification. Subject right of way is considered deficient if half-width of the existing right of way does not meet that determined necessary within the County's current transportation plan. The applicant is required to dedicate additional right-of-way to provide 49 feet from centerline of SW Greenburg Road. NOTE:All private signage and improvements are required to be located outside of the dedicated ROW. City Casefile(SDR)2014-0002 Page 2 of 5 5. ILLUMINATION- Resolution and Order No. 86-95 requires access points on collectors and arterials to be adequately illuminated. To meet this requirement, a public street light will have to be installed at the proposed site access to SW Greenburg Road (Contact Ed Anderson — 503.846.7956). 6. Washington County requires submittal of an Access Report when estimated daily trip generation of a project and existing traffic levels on the adjacent County road exceed given limits as determined by R&O 86-95. Washington County Traffic Engineering staff reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis (Lancaster Engineering — April 7, 2014 & December 23, 2014) submitted for this development proposal as required by R&O 86-95. Based on the results included in the report, additional traffic mitigation on County-maintained roads is not warranted at this time. REQUIRED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Refer to the following link to access Washington County Road Design and Construction Standards: http.//www.co.washington.or.us/LUT/Divisions/Fngineerinq/Consultant Resources/road-design-standards.cfm PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT BY THE CITY OF TIGARD: A. The following shall be recorded with Washington County (Contact Scott Young, Survey Division: 846-7933): 1. Dedication of additional right-of-way to provide 49 feet from the centerline of SW Greenburg Road. 2. Provision of a non-access reservation along SW Greenburg Road frontage except at the access approved in conjunction with this application. B. Submit to Washington County Public Assurance Staff, 503-846-3843: 1. Completed "Design Option" form. 2. $3,735.00 Administration Deposit. NOTE: The Administration Deposit is a cost-recovery account used to pay for County services provided to the developer, including plan review and approval, field inspections, as-built approval, and project administration. The Administration Deposit amount noted above is an estimate of what it will cost to provide these services. If, during the course of the project, the Administration Deposit account is running low, additional funds will be requested to cover the estimated time left on the project(at then-current rates per the adopted Washington County Fee Schedule). If there am any unspent funds at project close out, they will be refunded to the applicant. Anv point of contact with County stall can be a changeable cost. If project plans are not complete or do not City Casefile(SDR)2014-0002 Page 3 of 5 comply with County standards and codes, costs will be higher. There is a charge to cover the cost of every field inspection. Costs for enforcement actions will also be charred to the applicant. 3. A copy of the City's Land Use Approval with Conditions, signed and dated. 4. Preliminary certification of adequate sight distance for each access point to SW Greenburg Road, in accordance with County Code, prepared and stamped by a registered professional engineer, as well as: a. A detailed list of improvements necessary to produce adequate intersection sight distance (refer to the following webpage for sight distance certification submittal requirements). http:/hvww.co washinaton.or.us/LUTIDivisions/CurrentPlanningldevelopment-application-forms.cfm 5. Three (3) sets of complete engineering plans for construction of the following public improvements: a. Construction of a half-street improvement (existing lane configuration to remain the same) to include a 6' bike lane with 2' buffer, gutter, curb, 6' sidewalk separated by a 5' planter strip to County Standards. Reconstruction of the existing pavement to the centerline of SW Greenburg Road may be required. Street trees shall be installed at intervals required by the City of Tigard. b. Access to SW Greenburg Road to County standards. c. Improvements within the right-of-way as necessary to provide adequate intersection sight distance at SW Greenburg Road access point. d. Closure of all existing driveways to SW Greenburg Road, other than the access approved by Washington County under the current land use application. e. Installation of illumination at the site's access to SW Greenburg Road to County Standards. C. Obtain a Washington County Facility Permit upon completion of the following: 1. Obtain Engineering Division approval and provide a financial assurance for the construction of the public improvements listed in conditions 1.13.5. NOTE: The Public Assurance staff (503-846-3843) will send the required forms to the applicant's representative after submittal and approval of items listed under I.B. The Facility Permit allows construction work within County rights-of-way and permits site access only after the developer first submits plans and obtains Washington County Engineering approval, obtains required grading and erosion control permits, and satisfies various other requirements of Washington County's Assurances Section including but not limited to execution of financial and contractual agreements. This process ensures that City Casefile(SDR)2014-0002 Page 4 of 5 the developer accepts responsibility for construction of public improvements, and that improvements are closely monitored, inspected, and built to standard in a timely manner. Access will only be permitted under the required Washington County Facility Permit, and only following submittal and County acceptance of all materials required under the facility permit process. 2. Provide evidence that documents reflecting required provisions under I.A. have been recorded. II. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY: Obtain a Finaled Washington County Facility Permit, contingent upon the following: A. The road improvements required in condition I.B.5. above shall be completed and accepted by Washington County. B. Upon completion of necessary improvements, submit final certification of adequate sight distance in accordance with County Code, prepared and stamped by a registered professional engineer. Requirements identified within this letter are considered by the County to be minimum warranted improvements (and/or analyses) that are necessitated by the proposed development, therefore it is requested that they be conveyed to the applicant within the City's Approval document. Please send a copy of the subsequent Final City Notice of Decision and any appeal information to the County. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions, please contact me at 503-846-7639. Naomi Vogel Associate Plann r Cc: Rob Saxton,P.E.-Road&Bridge Engineering Services Paul Seitz,Assurances Section Transportation File City Casefile(SDR) 2014-0002 Page 5 of 5 CleanWater Services MEMORANDUM Date: November 12,2014 To: Agnes Kowacz, Associate P er, City of Tigard From: Jackie Sue Humphrey lean Water Services (the District) Subject: Greenburg Apartments, SDR 2014-00002, 1 S 126DC00900 Please include the following comments when writing your conditions of approval: PRIOR TO ANY WORK ON THE SITE A Clean Water Services (the District) Storm Water Connection Permit Authorization must be obtained. Application for the District's Permit Authorization must be in accordance with the requirements of the Design and Construction Standards, Resolution and Order No. 07-20, (or current R&O in effect at time of Engineering plan submittal), and is to include: a. Detailed plans prepared in accordance with Chapter 2, Section 2.04.2.b-1. b. Detailed grading and erosion control plan. An Erosion Control Permit will be required. Area of Disturbance must be clearly identified on submitted construction plans. If site area and any offsite improvements required for this development exceed one-acre of disturbance,project will require a 1200-CN Erosion Control Permit. c. Detailed plans showing the development having direct access by gravity to public storm and sanitary sewer. d. Provisions for water quality in accordance with the requirements of the above named design standards. Water Quality is required for all new development and redevelopment areas per R&O 07-20, Section 4.05.5, Table 4-1. Access shall be provided for maintenance of facility per R&O 07-20, Section 4.02.4. e. If use of an existing offsite or regional Water Quality Facility is proposed, it must be clearly identified on plans, showing its location, condition, capacity to treat this site and, any additional improvements and/or upgrades that may be needed to utilize that facility. 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway • Hillsboro,Oregon 97123 Phone: (503)681-3600 • Fax: (503)681-3603 • cleanwaterservices.org 0 WASTE MANAGEMENT October 13th,2014 Daryl Retzlaff Evergreen Builders,LLC Re: Design Plans for Greenburg Road Apartments. Daryl, Waste Management of Oregon-Washington County Operations, has reviewed the design plans for Greenburg Road Apartments in Tigard, Oregon. We have determined that we can adequately access and provide garbage and recycling collection services with our equipment within the proposed site design. Sincerely, Darin Flaig Route Manager Waste Management of Oregon l �MI I � I � II � 1 � 1II I < I I I I Iii I 14.01ee21K0.115..4Y — /'• Ifl MYeyceo ID at '\ JJ,,��//// ruureee..uiwevmwww N.•e�ia '�i a uwnnYau • � _ .� 4lRd raer.r.een,w OLLM.1WrAf YWVY A+W6Y4 .ewa MOIL[MA xraorf ay I[/ aleer1/44 —4 ffi nvnerm I 0Of rIgurea raromu Hato r e" ,0 0 • 'L@'Wlxwe A YvWemY n.mLMi WNW../ 'WOO MU.ree.m 00 1 .Mrnenayu(IWJ L 1 /I �a'cvwa)K j 1 +aro[Iml WOglna,yerr,OJ rn.u.Mal 0 n,mreION WM 1` ra.rame ten.. `.Y.yeu.,omaloye<,n.ya In Co wow Ar lama MST PLAN 1 1 , I r r I I i Il �������. ',./tiI ', 1�1 r 1' I I r 1 1 l ����Me��. 5 r' ■���=��� rJ. 1 l I J L 1 r( 11 1'I ,'1 1 i 111211•11•111•11=11=11•11• �e�e�MM.1•.Y•� Ill I , ������� i Agnes Kowacz From: Tod Shattuck <Tod.Shattuck@pgn.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2014 12:37 PM To: Agnes Kowacz Cc: Lorraine Katz Subject: Greenburg Apartments plan review request. Agnes, Can you add Lorraine Katz as the PGE contact for this project. She can be reached at 503-672-5484 or Lorraine.katz@pgn.com Thanks, Tod L. Shattuck Project Manager Service&Design r Portland General Electric Western Region 2213 SW 153,d Dr.,Beaverton,OR 97006 Cell:503-672-5466 E-mail:tod.shattuckOpgn.com 1 Agnes Kowacz From: Cousineau, John <John.Cousineau©ftr.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2014 10:53 AM To: Agnes Kowacz Subject: Site Development Review (SDR) 2014-00002 I have reviewed the basic plan and see no conflicts at this time. If there is a street improvement I found one pole that may have an issue. Thank you for your time. John Cousineau Network Engineer, Network Engineering& Planning Frontier Communications 4155 SW Cedar Hills Blvd. Beaverton, OR. 97055 503-643-0371(o) 971-708-2412(c) 503-643-0977(f) iohn.cousineau@ftr.com frontier N•9h.$p.b Internet "1 Can Help You" 1 .. III = City of Tigard TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DA 1'E: October 30, 2014 TO: Police FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Agnes Kowacz,Associate Planner Phone: (503) 718-2427 Fax: (503) 718-2748 Email: agneskna.tigard-or.gov SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2014-00002/ ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2014-00010/ 2014-00011 - GREENBURG APARTMENTS - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a site development review for a 66 unit apartment complex,with 23 garages,located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road. The site will be served by an access drive from SW Greenburg Road. The proposal also includes two adjustments.The first adjustment is to the parking standards for a nine percent reduction of off-site parking requirements. The second adjustment is to the access standards. LOCATION: The property is located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road.The site is on the east side of SW Greenburg Road and within the Washington Square Regional Center. Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 1S126DC,Tax Lot 00900. ZONE: MUE-1: The MUE-1 and 2 zoning district is designed to apply to areas where employment uses such as office,research and development and light manufacturing are concentrated. Commercial and retail support uses are allowed but are limited, and residential uses are permitted which arc compatible with employment character of the area. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment-1. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.360, Site Development Review; 18.370, Variances and Adjustments; 18.390, Procedures; 18.520, Commercial Zoning Districts; 18.705, Access Egress and Circulation; 18.725, Environmental Performance Standards; 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste; 18.765, Off-Street Parking and Loading; 18.780, Signs;18.790,Urban Forestry; 18.795,Visual Clearance;18.810,Street and Utility Improvement Standards. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement/Plans for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: FRIDAY,NOVEMBER 14, 2014. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date,please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions,contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. — Please contact of our office. _ Please refer to the enclosed letter. X Written comments provided below: Not, k'!`°\ A ds+ o Atcl 11 `�1Q cion -fib vAGu Q. 4LG50(1064z. o X cvi o i c s � deka cYw•e. u Q d . �J Name&Number of Person(s) Commenting: �e v'J 3,`f / �I L�fNti� rG��1Ck `ate 7). l Ig •2 510 November 11, 2014 Agnes Kowacz RECEIVE 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 NOV 1 3 2014 Re: Case Number SUB2014-00002/VAR2014-00010/VAR2014-00011 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING/ENGINEERING Dear Agnes, We are writing to formally register our concerns about the proposed use of land at 9550 Greenburg Rd., We live on the adjacent property, 9640 SW Greenburg Rd.The residence in which we live lies right along the edge of the property where the new buildings would be. You can certainly understand that there we have many concerns about the proposed building of a large apartment complex right next to our home (not the least of these concerns is the fact that there are already several high-density housing complexes along Greenburg Rd., and placing apartments next to apartments in our area sounds downright awful), but our main point of contention actually pertains to how such a complex could pose problems for our property. Our home sits on a piece of property owned by our church. The church is next door on the same property with land behind and parking in the front. It is clear from the land use proposal that parking is going to be an issue at the new complex. Since there is no street parking available along Greenburg Rd, and since there isn't any room in the plans for additional overflow parking, we are very worried that this will prompt residents and visitors to use the church parking lot.This will be totally unacceptable. Our members are often on the property working, our children play in the parking lot as any child who lives in a normal neighborhood might play in their front yard or driveway, and our members are corning and going to worship and other functions. Having extra traffic attracted to and driving through our parking lot would be a danger to our members and our children. It would also create extra wear and tear on the parking lot that would require additional maintenance and as a non-profit organization money is always tight. Additionally, the purpose of our parking lot is to be a place for our members to park for worship. We can't have additional cars in our lot keeping our parishioners from parking. The planners of this property might express that they will make it clear to residents that they can't park in our lot. I can assure you that this is a promise that they won't be able to keep, nor is it one that they will take it upon themselves to enforce. We have had many people over the years parking without permission. With this new complex there will certainly be more.There will be guests of residents who aren't aware of the rules or who simply don't care.The only way we can assure that we don't have anyone parking in our lot uninvited would be to put up barricades, or to put up signs and threaten that unauthorized cars would be towed. We have no wish to do that. We have people stopping through at non-church hours needing the services of the church. We don't want to be put into a position where we have to have cars towed.That would hurt our reputation in the community and make us seem like a cranky group who wants the "kids to get off our lawn." This would not be a problem if the proposed plans had sufficient parking relative to the number of residences.There should not be allowances given with respect to parking requirements, in this case. We ask that you will consider this very major concern and not approve the plans as they currently stand. If you have any questions regarding our concerns,we can be contacted at(503)620-2354.Thank you. Sincerely, Daniel and Amanda Moll q6 `(O 9W Crie<-ti Jt 7 l %/y"6 C7+22 77zz3 Agnes Kowacz From: Elisabeth & Pieter Braam <elieter.braam@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 8:29 PM To: Agnes Kowacz Subject: proposed development Case ID SUB2014-00002NAR2014-00010NAR2014-00011. I urge the City of Tigard to deny this proposal. The plan provides for only one access which is insufficient for a development of this size. The connection to Greenburg Road, as yet poorly defined, is bound to result in traffic conflicts. The insufficient number of parking spaces will result in off-site parking which will be a major burden on the neighborhood. And the school? What will the developer contribute to the school district? Ten pounds of xxxx in a five pound bag. Pieter Braam 9315 SW Lehman St. Tigard, OR 97223 i Agnes Kowacz From: Greg Berry Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 9:09 AM To: Agnes Kowacz; Mike McCarthy Subject: FW: response to 66 unit apartment building proposal on Greenberg FYI From: Charli [mailto:studentdriven@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 4:33 PM To: Greg Berry; Greg Berry; Charli Chambers Subject: response to 66 unit apartment building proposal on Greenberg November 13, 2014 Re: Proposed Construction of 66 unit apt building on Greenburg Dear Tigard Planners: Unlike many citizens of this area, I am not opposed to building and development in Metzger, however, I do feel that it needs to be thoughtfully designed with safety concerns of utmost importance. Second in importance, would be the impact development would have in the vicinity of the development proposed. Here are my thoughts; I hope you will consider them carefully when making your decisions for development of this site and future sites in our lovely city of Tigard. We, the citizens, can only suggest; you, however, are entrusted to make careful, thoughtful decisions that affect not only our economy, but the quality of our lives, our health and safety. History has much to teach us, if we learn from its lessons. I reference the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire of 1911 . It was a deadly fire that cost 146 lives because of dangerous conditions, most importantly, the inadequate number of unblocked escape routes. Yes, it was an industrial fire in a multistory building, but the principles to be learned are the same. 1 Allowing a 66 unit apartment building to be built where a second access/egress would not be possible is unwise, dangerous. Codes requiring multiple ways into and out of developments were put into place by responsible individuals who learned from tragedies like the one mentioned above. This is why trains, planes, ships, schools, nursing homes, hospitals, department stores, high rise buildings, etc. all have multiple means of escape. Should the one and only proposed access road from Greenberg into this proposed apartment building be blocked by fire, explosion, fumes, fallen trees, traffic congestion, pedestrian traffic, Washington Square shoppers on foot and in vehicles, school busses, transit busses, bicycle traffic, refuse pickup trucks, and funeral processions from the nearby cemetery, lives could be lost. I also fear that emergency responders could be blocked from entry to this proposed apartment building for the same reasons. I live in this area, so I know just how congested this access area already is. Traffic is often bumper-to-bumper here because of its proximity to the intersection at Greenburg and Hall, Washington Square Mall entrances and the entrance to Les Schwab, an adjacent apartment building, a Lutheran Church parking lot, accesses to Fwy 217 North and South and numerous surrounding businesses. I do not believe that this particular stretch of Greenberg for mile in either direction could withstand the impact to pedestrian and motorized vehicle and bicycle traffic that an additional 66 units would precipitate. I foresee a dangerous traffic gridlock developing, and I shudder to think about the danger to pedestrians trying to access mass transit cyclists, not to mention motorists. This area is already in bumper to bumper near gridlock from Thanksgiving until mid-January due to shopping traffic from the Washington Mall. I am fortunate that I have three other exits from my neighborhood so I can avoid Greenburg altogether during this time of year, and so can the emergency responders. But what will happen to the residents of this proposed development? They will have no alternative route in or out of their development, neither will their emergency responders. Much less serious, but certainly of concern for residents of Lehman Street and SW 92nd Rd. is the reduction of parking spaces requested by the developer. Sixty-six units of one and two bdm apartments will mean even 2 more automobiles will require parking than are already planned for. Visitors, overnight guests, deliveries, repair vehicles, etc. all require a place to park that is safe and legal. There is no legal, safe, close-by off-street parking available at this proposed site. The closest place for a visitor to park would be on SW Lehman Street or SW 92nd Rd. These streets have no sidewalks and are narrow currently not allowing two way traffic in areas (one car at a time). I am concerned about driving safety place to park that is safe and legal. There is no legal, safe, close-by off-street parking available at this proposed site. The closest place for a visitor to park would be on SW Lehman Street or SW 92nd Rd. These streets have no sidewalks and are narrow currently not allowing two way traffic in areas when anyone attempts to park on the street. I am concerned about driving safety place to park that is safe and legal for the residents of the proposed 66 units. There is no legal, safe, close-by off-street parking available at this proposed site. The closest place for a visitor to park would be on SW Lehman Street or SW 92nd Rd. These streets have no sidewalks and are narrow, currently not allowing two way traffic in some places already. I am very concerned about the possibility of more cars being parked on Lehman causing me and my neighbors to be in danger of emergency responder delay due to congestion in our neighborhood. Consider also that anyone parking on Lehman and 92nd would either be walking through a private condominium complex via 92st. or walking on Lehman Street and Greenberg Road to reach the apartment complex. NONE of these streets have sidewalks. F�g Lastly, I want to bring to your attention that turning left onto Greenberg out the proposed 66 units in reference would most definitely be dangerous to motorists, pedestrians, cyclists and would be certain to further impede traffic. A left turn onto Greenberg would be required for the closest access to WY 217 both north and south. Responding to this matter with the assumption that people will take mass transit is to in essence ignore this matter altogether. The fact is, people drive automobiles, and usually more than one to a family. When one considers that it would take over 30 minutes to get to a full service grocery store by bus from this proposed sight, I question the ability of mass transit dependent residents to transport food safely in warm weather. Please take into consideration times when traffic is so congested that busses are delayed. Are these best practices? Is this safe? Is this proposed apartment building with only one 3 access road and reduced parking places a residence you would want for your parents or your children? Would you sleep well knowing your loved ones only had one exit route in case of an emergency, and that the residents of 65 other units were all trying to escape through the same route? Would you want them to be waiting for emergency services during the holidays with only one congested route to them might be blocked by gridlock? I trust you will take my thoughts into consideration and that you will use good judgement when making your decisions. Thank you for your time and attention to my concerns. Sincerely, Charli Chambers 9170 SW Lehman Street Portland, OR 97223 DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules"City General Records Retention Schedule." 4 III = City of Tigard TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DA I'L: October 30,2014 TO: Public Works —j al, 00&��� FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division/ STAFF CONTACT: Agnes Kowacz,Associate Planner Phone: (503) 718-2427 Fax: (503) 718-2748 Email: agneskatigard-or.gov SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2014-00002/ ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2014-00010/ 2014-00011 - GREENBURG APARTMENTS - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a site development review for a 66 unit apartment complex,with 23 garages, located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road. The site will be served by an access drive from SW Greenburg Road. The proposal also includes two adjustments. The first adjustment is to the parking standards for a nine percent reduction of off-site parking requirements. The second adjustment is to the access standards. LOCATION: The property is located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road.The site is on the east side of SW Greenburg Road and within the Washington Square Regional Center.Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 1S126DC,Tax Lot 00900. ZONE: MUE-1: The MUE-1 and 2 zoning district is designed to apply to areas where employment uses such as office,research and development and light manufacturing are concentrated. Commercial and retail support uses are allowed but are limited, and residential uses are permitted which are compatible with employment character of the area. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment-1. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.360, Site Development Review; 18.370, Variances and Adjustments; 18.390, Procedures; 18.520, Commercial Zoning Districts; 18.705,Access Egress and Circulation; 18.725, Environmental Performance Standards; 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste; 18.765, Off-Street Parking and Loading; 18.780, Signs; 18.790,Urban Forestry;18.795,Visual Clearance; 18.810,Street and Utility Improvement Standards. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement/Plans for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: FRIDAY,NOVEMBER 14, 2014. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date,please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. — — Please contact of our office. — Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: — 1'✓ ) Name&Number of Person(s) Commenting: /-"f Ciry of Tigard ea�J E-//i>,o S77M FE- UPIc " TDT-COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT TAX TIGARD Rate Calculation Worksheet APPLICANT G_, Uiez.„ 4 yS- DATE A/� 6 MAILING ADDRESS PREPARED BY /WS CITY/ZIP/PHONE PLANS CHECK# TAX MAP# / i C—c,090 PROJECT TITLE SITUS#ADDRESS 9 5-5-0 6 _.ps4 u2G ia FORMER USE(S) �� USE ITE # TDT DESCRIPTION/NOTES # CODE UNITS X RATE = AMOUNT `/ ^fzS X � VAe4 Z7 X = X = X = TOTAL TDT,FORMER USE(S) PROPOSED USE(S) USE ITE # TDT X RATE = DESCRIPTION/NOTES # CODE UNITS AMOUNT I .120 lep x 'JJ2 57- _fg<1(0,962- X = X = X = TOTAL TDT,PROPOSED USE(S) , 1/¢/ 9 G L •"7-20774t. �• _ f II (L o, p UNH(fl&w-T b ,'r g/3 aios/ LESS TOTAL TDT,FORMER SE(S) — / TDT INCREASE/(DECREASE) g� , 9�2' (INCREASE=TDT DUE) PAYMENT METHOD PlK5 - CASH/CHECK fa421-.42'evr .f5"/ SL. Z.Y CREDIT G Az, ''`;156, _ Llf— c if 3 5/4 44 S BANCROFTAGREEMENT (PROMISSORY NOTE) DEFER TO OCCUPANCY I/OFS/CD/FORMS/TDT Rate Calculation Worksheet.indd Rev.4/22/09) MAILING / NOTIFICATION RECORDS Notice of a Type II Decision e r Site Development Review TIGARD Case ID: SDR2014-00002/VAR2014-00010/VAR2014-00011 GREENBURG APARTMENTS The Decision Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the proposed site development review, 6% on-site parking adjustment,and access spacing adjustment, subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI of this decision. Tigard Community Development Contact Information Date of Notice: Monday,May 18, 2015 120 days = Tuesday,June 23,2015 Staff Contact: Gary Pagenstecher 503-718-2434 Garyp@tigard-or.gov Appeal Information All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision may appeal the decision.Appeal forms are available on the city's website or by person at the Permits Center. If you would like to appeal this land use decision,we need to receive your completed appeal form by 4 p.m. on Thursday,June 04,2015. Please include the Case ID Number. SDR2014-00002. Please hand-deliver your completed appeal form (which will be time-stamped) and pay the associated appeal fees at the Permits Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223. If you have any questions regarding this decision please address them to the appropriate staff person noted on this form: Gary Pagenstecher and note the Case ID Number: SDR2014-00002 This decision is final on Monday, May 18, 2015, unless an appeal is filed. The decision will go into effect on Monday,June 08,2015,unless an appeal is filed.A copy of the Final Decision is available upon request from the staff contact person noted above. Information About the Decision Applicant: Evergreen Builders,LLC Owner: Greenburg Road Apartments,LLC c/o Joe Westerman 7420 SW Hunziker Road,Suite D 7420 SW Hunziker Road, Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Description of the Proposal: The applicant is requesting site development review for seven three-story buildings, 63 unit apartment complex with 23 garages on 1.57 acres. The site will be served by an access drive from SW Greenburg Road. The proposal also includes two adjustments: 1) an on-site parking adjustment from 100 required spaces to 94 spaces,a 6%reduction,and 2) an access spacing adjustment from 600 feet to approximately 100 feet along SW Greenburg,an arterial street. City of Tigard,Community Development Division•13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 pg. 1 Address: 9550 SW Greenburg Road; Legal Washington County Tax Map 1 S126DC,Tax Lot 00900 Description: Zoning: MUE-1: Mixed Use Employment Districts Appeal Procedure Details The decision of the Director (Type II Procedure) or Review Authority (Type II Administrative Appeal or Type III Procedure) is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. The deadline for filing an appeal is 4 p.m. on Thursday,June 04,2015 Vicinity Map Site Plan City of Tigard,Community Development Division•13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 pg.2 '' / I i . BEAVE.r;� T.®IN go fQ� Zoning Map a � I�y0 I- Generalized Zoning Categories k. Legend 4 Q OE Subject Site C311023 ` D a\ ti _.i Zone Description \`-. SiThARCRESF IR'�1 Residential Th —.{JNg Mixed Use Residential e Mixed Use Central Business District `, 'If OM Commercial 0 Il -Mixed Use Employment Ljc- - I up Industrial ~1„` — Parks and Recreation 4� Imo -Washington.County Zoning ONICui[�04 DQ _ '/ /•M I I G%�Overlay Zones ■ Historic District Overlay •- I �Planned Development Overlay 040GJ @QMARE o 0 �1IlI���1��1>,.. r _ _ L ` -"�. r en - fb BORDERS ST 'w w //J/I Q Jh qiiiiiiiiri R-4.5 �� —� _ L E H A N S T 5, Map printed;28-Oct-14 / I _ II1 } -"'I 1 INTORMASHOUL ER19ERIFiE E ETTIERALLOCPTION ii R_� /� i �A I( --• I ( ONL AND9HOULDSER ;Si _.i T�''r-- -"-J--rL---' OATA IS DERNED FRON MULTIPLE SQURCE9.TEIE CITY OF TI34Rc l i._ill I 1_-� MAvESNOTw:RR,NTv,REPREBEN7ATION.OROUAREMTEEasroyHE �I�.�I� I�I - I I GORIER;ACCURACY TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY THE LiJ I i 1 i + OAT4 RRONDED HEREIN.THE CIT:Ts IRA4DACCU ACIESI 'H x J ' UeASNFO FOR ANY ERRORS, RED ,OR INACCURACIES R''HE E..� fff MFOgMAT1,ON VRCVIDED REDLES80F Hd.Y f.4UeEp Mom+ /111 _ uJ i _.J CORAL ST COMMUNITY DEVELO' N RTMENT r A Pace r Colt —�-' '' 1 r 1 r 1 1 I ce o a Home" N L,..•1 -iri �_ crtyofrlgara (;PD)lri — jV �—� { fl6AR�MAPs a,zsswlanBNd N 0 245 490 I I 1 Tigard.OR 97223 N e • RR 503 839-4171 �� I I i yaw.tigardor.gov ncaao AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING TIGARD I, Agnes Kowacz, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Associate Planner for the City of Tigard,Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following. (Check Appropriate Box(s)Below} ® NOTICE OF Type II Proposal FOR: SDR2014-00002/VAR2014-00010/VAR2014-00011 ❑ AMENDED NOTICE— ® Community Development Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit "A", and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit "B", and by reference made a part hereof, October 30,2014,and deposited in the United States Mail on October 30,2014,postage prepaid. -41A116 Cigit'CV Agnes Kowacz STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 30 day of OCA-ObC.c ,2014. f ti. OFFICIAL STAMP BETSY GAUCIA NOTARY SION NO. 25741 G a COMMISSION N0.925741 cis,-„),L MISSION EXPIRES MARCH 09,2018 NOTARY PUBL C OF OREGON /� My Commission Expires: 3 19 / i S 1:\CDADM\Sr Administrative Specialist\Affidavits\2014\Affidavit of Mailin Notice of Type II Proposal_SDR201400002_VAR2014111NI70_VAR201400011_Agnes.docx III Notice of a Type II Proposal Site Development Review TIGARD p Case ID: SDR2014-00002/VAR2014-00010/VAR2014-00011 Tigard Community Development Contact Information Date of Notice: Thursday, October 30, 2014 120 days = Wednesday, February 18, 2015 To: Interested Persons Staff Contact: Agnes Kowacz 503-718-2427 agnesk@tigard-or.gov If you would like to comment on this proposal, we need to receive your written comments by 5 p.m. on Friday, November 14, 2014 . Please mail or deliver your comments to 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223. Include the Case ID Number: SUB2014-00002/VAR2014-00010/VAR2014-00011. Please address your comments to the appropriate staff person: Agnes Kowacz. Information About the Proposal Description of the Proposal: The applicant is requesting a site development review for a 66 unit apartment complex with 23 garages, located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road. The site will be served by an access drive from SW Greenburg Road. The proposal also includes two adjustments. The first adjustment is to the parking standards for a nine percent reduction to off-site parking requirements. The second adjustment is to the access standards. Applicant: Evergreen Builders,LLC Joe Westerman 7420 SW Hunziker Road, Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 Owner 1: Same as applicant Proposal Address: 9550 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, OR 97223 Legal 1S126DC00900 Description: Zoning: MUE-1: Mixed Use Employment Districts Approval Criteria: TDC 18.360 and 18.370 What You Should Know About This Type II Proposal The proposed development requires a land use review. The goal of this notice is to invite interested parties to participate early in the decision-making process by submitting comments in writing during the open comment period. City of Tigard,Community Development Division•13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 I/CURPLN/Forms/CU Staff Reports/Notice of Type II Proposal_Templ_06-05-12 Type II decisions are made by the Community Development Director after consideration of relevant evidence and public comments received during the open comment period. The decision will be mailed to the applicant and to owners of property located within 500 feet of the proposal site and anyone who submitted written comments or is otherwise entitled to a decision notice. The decision maker may: • Approve the proposal. • Approve the proposal with conditions. • Deny the proposal. All evidence considered in the decision will be contained in the public record and available for public review. If you would like to review this material, please schedule an appointment with Lora Garland, Records Management Specialist, 503-718-2483. If you wish to receive copies of the materials, city records will prepare them for you at a reasonable cost. Appeal Information Failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Comments directed at the relevant approval criteria (Tigard Development Code) are what constitute relevant evidence. Details regarding the appeal process and requirements are contained within Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.390. There is a fee charged for appeals. Attachments Included in this Notice Zoning and Site Map Notice to Mortgagee, Lienholder,Vendor, or Seller The Tigard Development Code requires that if you receive this notice it shall be promptly forwarded to the purchaser. City of Tigard,Community Development Division•13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 I/CURPLN/Forms/QJ Staff Reports/Notice of Type II Proposal_Templ_06-05-12 APPLICANT MATERIALS EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC EI Letter of Transmittal REEL JUN 2 4 2014 To: Agnes Kowacz, Associate Planner, City of Tigard CITY OF TlGA9D From: Daryl Retzlaff PLANNING/ENGiNEERING CC: Date: Jun 18,2014 Subject: Three sets of application evidence addressing your 5/27/04 incomplete letter for the Greenburg Apartments. (Case File#SDR2014-00002NAR2014-00010NAR2014-00011) 1. As per Item# 1 of your incomplete letter,enclosed please find three revised application narratives and impact analysis narratives addressing those items you requested to be changed or revised. 2. As per Item#2 of your incomplete letter,enclosed please find three revised site plans addressing those items you requested to be changed or revised. Also note that we have included storm drainage plans and sanitary sewer plans as part of our plan sets. 3. As per Item#3 of your incomplete letter,enclosed please find three revised Urban Forestry Plans, prepared by James Clark,Landscape Architect,and addressing those items you requested to be changed or revised. Note that we have included the credentials of Mr. Clark. 4. As per Item# 4 of your incomplete letter, enclosed please find two sets of envelopes, postage and mailing labels of property owners within 500'and interested parties. We believe that, based on the attached submissions, you now have all that you will need to make the filing complete for processing. 416 LAUREL AVE . # 3 , TILLAMOOK , OR 97141 Page 1of1 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 it EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC DECEIVED APR 232015 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING/ENGINEERING Date: 4/22/15 To: Gary Pagenstecher From: Daryl Retzlaff Evergreen Builders Re: Greenburg Road Apartments (SDR 2014-00002) Gary, With this latest submittal of our proposal for the Greenburg Road Apartments, Evergreen Builders would like to file for an extension to the review period. We are requesting an extension until June 25, 2015. Thank you, Daryl Retzlaff Evergreen Builders 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 4tEVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC , RECEIVED APR 232015 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING/ENGINEERING Date: 4/22/15 Request: Response to Site Development Review (SDR) 2014-00002 Applicant: Evergreen Builders, LLC c/o Joe Westerman 7420 SW Hunziker Rd,Suite D Tigard,OR 97223 In response to the Notice of Type II Decision, Evergreen Builders would like to submit the following revisions to our previous submittal. Inventory of revised documents: • Narrative dated 4/9/15,4th revision • Parking Addendum dated March 25, 2015 • Plan sheets 1-19 • Landscape plans L 1-5 The following changes have been made to the documents above that should bring all areas of concern into conformance with the City of Tigard Construction Standards. SECTION VI. C. Exterior Elevations The three buildings along the Northern property line had no offsets in the rear of the building. Gables have been added to the rear of the building to break up the roof line and to reduce the maximum overhang to less than 25' (see plan sheets 9 and 11). E. Private outdoor area-Multifamily use All private outdoor decks and balconies are minimum 48 square feet(see individual floor plans sheets 8, 10, 14 and 18) 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC F. Shared outdoor recreation area—Multifamily use For the proposed 63 unit mix of one and two bedroom apartments required outdoor space both public and private needs to total 12600 square feet.As shown on plan sheet 1 private outdoor space has been calculated at 9785 square feet and private outdoor space has 3348 square feet for a total of 13,133 square feet (calculations plan sheet 1). Plan sheet 19,a detailed site lighting plan, has been added at the request of the Tigard Police Department. J. Public Transit The project has interconnecting paths from the interior of the project to the public sidewalk on Greenburg Road. We will be required to construct a 6' city sidewalk along our frontage on Greenburg to connect the public facilities(plan sheets 1 and 6). TriMet was contacted and their response to our conversations was included in our original proposal.We asked them if we could provide a bus turn out or a bus shelter on our property and they were not interested. We contacted them again to ask about improving one of their existing facilities,their response is included below: Here's the situation,at either or both stops we'd be looking for you to build a concrete pad for a small transit plaza large enough to accommodate one of our standard shelters in the future. However,we only install and maintain shelters at stops with approximately 50 or more boardings per day. The stop further from you nearly meets that criteria. The stop near your development has only 7 boardings per day and the new development is unlikely to bump the number sufficiently to justify a shelter. We could install a bench though. Some explore the idea of providing their own shelter. However,TriMet will not be responsible for ongoing maintenance in this scenario. I do not know what the City of Tigard would consider sufficient to improve transit amenities in the area to provide you with an waiver of the restrictions. However, I hope this helps paint a picture of the situation and how it would play out. I'm happy to discuss further by phone if that's of help. We will be willing to work with TriMet to install a bench at one of their existing stops as a condition for final. 18.370 Variances and Adjustments 6.Adjustments to Parking Standards The original project as proposed was 66 units requiring 104 parking spaces.The revised proposal will reduce the number of apartment units to 63 and the required parking spaces to 99. The plan,as proposed, has 94 spaces (plan sheet 1)and has been studied by Todd Mobley of Lancaster Engineering. A parking study to support the parking reduction was prepared by Lancaster Engineering and has been included as an addendum to this proposal (attached).A draft of this addendum was submitted to Gary 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC Pagenstecher,City of Tigard Associate Planner, who gave Evergreen Builders the ok to proceed with this proposal based on the information contained. 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts The project has been redesigned to meet the development standards of the MUE-1 and a 20' setback has been included on the east property line (plan sheet 1).18.745.050 Buffering and Screening E.Screening and Special Provisions It was shown on our landscape plans (sheet L 1-5)that the minimum canopy coverage requirements were met, however,the City of Tigard determined that the trees were not distributed through the parking field adequately per the UFMP.A 6'wide island has been added to the south side of the parking lot and a tree will be added to better position the trees on the project(plan sheets L 1-5). 2.Screening of Service Facilities The only public facilities that will be located on the project will be electrical meters.The screening of these meters is addressed on page 23 of the narrative. 18.765 Off Street Parking E.Visitor Parking This item has previously discussed above in section 18.370 Variances and Adjustments. J.Wheel Stops Wheel stops have been added to all parking spaces(plan sheet 1). 18.790 Urban Forestry Plan 2.Tree Preservation A tree protection plan has been included (sheet L-5) 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM-ADDENDUM LANCASTER To: Joe Westerman ENGINEERING FROM: Todd E. Mobley, PE, PTOE 321 SW 4thAve.,Suite 400 Max Scheideman h2�Pore: OR 90313 p :50 503.248.0313 fax 503.248.9251 DATE: March 25, 20I5 laneasterengineerrg.com SUBJECT: Westerman Apartments Traffic Analysis—Addendum #2 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this addendum is to supplement the previously submitted traffic analysis for the proposed development and address comments received from the City of Tigard regarding the proposed parking reduction. This analysis is provided as a follow-up to discussion at our March 3`d meeting with Gary Pagenstecher at the City of Tigard. At the meeting,we discussed in detail the parking analysis that was provided in our original traffic analysis dated April 7, 2014. Specifically,we focused on the data in the Parking Generation Manual, Fourth Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE). Data in the manual represents actual,empirical data collected at apartment communities in the United States. It was noted that the manual includes data from Portland, Beaverton, Hillsboro,and from Vancouver, Washington. Despite the considerable amount of data demonstrating that the proposed parking would be sufficient, Mr. Pagenstecher was concerned that the code requires the "Use of transit, demand management programs, and/or special characteristics of the customer, client, employee, or resident population... "that will serve to reduce parking demand. Despite the considerable data presented, Mr. Pagenstecher was concerned that we had not adequately addressed the special characteristics that would support approval of the parking reduction. SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS In this case,the primary special characteristic is the location of the site + 1`ROhe``� and the resulting urban amenities available to residents. The site is ,5 GIN ssi located within the Washington Square Regional Center Plan District, �F9 �\ which plans for density and amenities that are consistent with Metro's Regional Urban Growth Management Functional Plan and are jr appropriate for an urban center. As explained in the original traffic OREGON analysis,the site is exceptionally well served by transit,given its y '(yg 2�� location within the Regional Center and its close proximity to �� SOD EMOg�' Washington Square. RENEWS: 12 ?, fly Joe Westerman April 14, 2015 Page 2 of 3 It is recognized that in the experience of the City of Tigard, parking deficiencies have been particularly problematic for apartment communities. However, this site is located in an urbanizing area and is less suburban in nature than many other areas in Tigard. As such, this neighborhood will be, on average, less automobile dependent, which leads to reduced parking demand. To demonstrate this reduction in demand, peak parking demand observations were made at the existing apartment community immediately north of the subject site. This neighboring apartment site is particularly relevant given its location and approximate size. It has a total of 52 dwelling units, compared to the 63 units currently proposed at the subject site. Consistent with the 1TE Parking Generation manual, peak demand observations at the adjacent site were made during overnight hours. It was found that there were a total of 71 parked vehicles at the site. With the 52 dwelling units, this results in a peak demand of 1.37 parking spaces per dwelling unit. By comparison, City of Tigard development code requires a total of 99 spaces for the proposed 63 dwelling units on the subject site, or a ratio of 1.57 spaces per dwelling unit. The current development proposal is for a reduction of only five spaces to 94,which is a ratio of 1.49 spaces per dwelling unit. Data from the ITE Parking Generation manual results in a ratio of 1.13 spaces per dwelling unit. These parking ratios are summarized in the table below. As you can see,the proposed parking supply is higher than both the ITE demand and the demand measured at the adjacent apartment complex. The proposed parking is only slightly lower than the City's requirement without the allowed reduction. Parking Ratio Summary Spaces per Dwelling Unit 1.fi 1.5 1.4c 1.3 1.2 1.1 1 ITE Parking Measured Peak Proposed Tigard Development Generation Manual Demand at Adjacent Development Code Peak Demand Apartments Joe Westerman April 14, 2015 Page 3 of 3 ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS In addition to the location of the site within an urbanizing area with excellent transit service, there are other considerations which are expected to result in a decrease in parking demand compared to other more auto-dependent sites in Tigard. These are as follows: • As explained in the original traffic analysis, this site has an excellent walking accessibility rating. This rating takes into account the proximity of transit as well as other attractors such as retail, services, schools, and parks. This high rating is a result of the site's location within a more dense and mixed-use area compared to other apartments in Tigard which may be more isolated in residential-only neighborhoods. • The development plan includes more bicycle parking than is required by City of Tigard code. In fact, interior bike parking, in the form of wall-hung bike spaces, are proposed in 25 percent of the dwelling units. This results in a total of 35 exterior bike spaces and 16 interior bike spaces, offering strong encouragement for bicycling. CONCLUSIONS As demonstrated by the original traffic analysis and this addendum, the proposed parking on the site will be adequate to serve the development. Tigard code section 18.370.020.C.6.a allows a reduction of up to 20 percent based on the use of transit, demand management programs, and special characteristics. A reduction of only five spaces, or five percent is proposed. This is supported by transit availability, demand management in the form of added interior bicycle parking, and a demonstrated reduction in parking demand for apartment units adjacent to the site. Based on this overwhelming evidence in support, it is recommended that the proposed parking reduction be granted. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM-ADDENDUM AS To: Joe Westerman EA INFER ER NG FROM: Todd E. Mobley, PE, PTOE 321 SW 41,Ave.,Suite 400 Max Scheideman o . , 0313 phone.503.248.0313 fax 503.248.9251 DATE: March 25, 2015 lancasterengineenng.com SUBJECT: Westerman Apartments Traffic Analysis—Addendum#2 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this addendum is to supplement the previously submitted traffic analysis for the proposed development and address comments received from the City of Tigard regarding the proposed parking reduction. This analysis is provided as a follow-up to discussion at our March 3`d meeting with Gary Pagenstecher at the City of Tigard. At the meeting, we discussed in detail the parking analysis that was provided in our original traffic analysis dated April 7,2014. Specifically,we focused on the data in the Parking Generation Manual, Fourth Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE). Data in the manual represents actual,empirical data collected at apartment communities in the United States. It was noted that the manual includes data from Portland, Beaverton, Hillsboro, and from Vancouver, Washington. Despite the considerable amount of data demonstrating that the proposed parking would be sufficient, Mr. Pagenstecher was concerned that the code requires the "Use of transit, demand management programs, and/or special characteristics of the customer, client, employee, or resident population... " that will serve to reduce parking demand. Despite the considerable data presented, Mr. Pagenstecher was concerned that we had not adequately addressed the special characteristics that would support approval of the parking reduction. SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS In this case,the primary special characteristic is the location of the site and the resulting urban amenities available to residents. The site is located within the Washington Square Regional Center Plan District,which plans for density and amenities that are consistent with Metro's Regional Urban Growth Management Functional Plan and are appropriate for an urban center. As explained in the original traffic analysis, the site is exceptionally well served by transit, given its location within the Regional Center and its close proximity to Washington Square. It is recognized that in the experience of the City of Tigard, parking deficiencies have been particularly problematic for apartment communities. However,this site is located in an urbanizing area and is less suburban in nature than many other areas in Tigard. As such,this neighborhood will be, on average, less automobile dependent, which leads to reduced parking demand. Joe Westerman March 25, 2015 Page 2 of 3 To demonstrate this reduction in demand, peak parking demand observations were made at the existing apartment community immediately north of the subject site. This neighboring apartment site is particularly relevant given its location and approximate size. It has a total of 52 dwelling units,compared to the 63 units currently proposed at the subject site. Consistent with the ITE Parking Generation manual, peak demand observations at the adjacent site were made during overnight hours. It was found that there were a total of 71 parked vehicles at the site. With the 52 dwelling units,this results in a peak demand of 1.37 parking spaces per dwelling unit. By comparison,City of Tigard development code requires a total of 99 spaces for the proposed 63 dwelling units on the subject site, or a ratio of 1.57 spaces per dwelling unit. The current development proposal is for a reduction of only five spaces to 94, which is a ratio of 1.49 spaces per dwelling unit. Data from the ITE Parking Generation manual results in a ratio of 1.13 spaces per dwelling unit. These parking ratios are summarized in the table below. As you can see,the proposed parking supply is higher than both the ITE demand and the demand measured at the adjacent apartment complex. The proposed parking is only slightly lower than the City's requirement without the allowed reduction. Parking Ratio Summary Spaces per Dwelling Unit 1.6 1.5 • 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 I ITE Parking Measured Peak Proposed Tigard Development Generation Manual Demand at Adjacent Development Code Peak Demand Apartments ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS In addition to the location of the site within an urbanizing area with excellent transit service,there are other considerations which are expected to result in a decrease in parking demand compared to other more auto-dependent sites in Tigard. These are as follows: Joe Westerman March 25,2015 Page 3 of 3 • As explained in the original traffic analysis,this site has an excellent walking accessibility rating. This rating takes into account the proximity of transit as well as other attractors such as retail, services, schools, and parks. This high rating is a result of the site's location within a more dense and mixed-use area compared to other apartments in Tigard which may be more isolated in residential-only neighborhoods. • The development plan includes more bicycle parking than is required by City of Tigard code. In fact, interior bike parking, in the form of wall-hung bike spaces,are proposed in 25 percent of the dwelling units. This results in a total of 35 exterior bike spaces and 16 interior bike spaces, offering strong encouragement for bicycling. CONCLUSIONS As demonstrated by the original traffic analysis and this addendum, the proposed parking on the site will be adequate to serve the development. Tigard code section 18.370.020.C.6.a allows a reduction of up to 20 percent based on the use of transit, demand management programs, and special characteristics. A reduction of only five spaces, or five percent is proposed. This is supported by transit availability, demand management in the form of added interior bicycle parking, and a demonstrated reduction in parking demand for apartment units adjacent to the site. Based on this overwhelming evidence in support, it is recommended that the proposed parking reduction be granted. BEDSAUL / VINCENT CONSULTING LLC 416 Laurel Ave. #3 Tillamook OR 97141 Office: (503) 842.5391 brucevincent@embargmail.com DATE: April 4th, 2014 (8/11/14 3"'Revision to address TVFR turnaround), (4/09/15 4'4 Revision to address project re-design) REQUEST: Type II Site Development Review with Adjustments to parking, access spacing to create the 63 unit Greenburg Apartments,(three story multifamily structures with 23 garages), in the MUE-1 zone APPLICANT: Joe Westerman, Evergreen Builders, LLC 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 OWNER: Joe Westerman, Evergreen Builders, LLC 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 APPLICANT' REPRESENTATIVES: (Planning) Bruce Vincent, Bedsaul/Vincent Consulting, LLC (Transportation Engineering) Todd Mobley, Lancaster Engineering (Site Design) Brandon York, Builders Design, Inc. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax Lot 900, Map 1S1-26DC SIZE: 1.572 Acres ZONING: MUE-1 Mixed Use Employment District LOCATION: 9550 SW Greenburg Road I. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Title 18: Development Code for the City of Tigard 18.360.030 & .090 Site Development Review 18.370.020 Variances/Adjustments 18.390.050 Decision Making Procedures-Type II Procedure/Impact Study (See Attached Impact Study as part of the entire submittal package) 1 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts, (MUE-1 Mixed Employment District) 18.630 Washington Square Regional Center 18.705 Access/Egress/Circulation 18.715 Density 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.745 Landscape & Screening Standards 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste & Recyclable Storage 18.765 Off-street Parking &Loading Requirements 18.780 Signs 18.790 Urban Forestry Plan 18.795 Vision Clearance 18.810 Street & Utility Improvement Standards II. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS 1. City of Tigard: - Department of Community Development - Department of Police - Department of Engineering 2. TVFR 3. Washington County Dept. of Land Use and Transportation III. BACKGROUND FACTS 1. On-Site Land Uses: The 1.572 Acre site is currently vacant and contains no structures. There are no trees within the area subject to development; all trees are "line trees" along the site's northern and southern borders. (See enclosed air photo site map) 2. Site Characteristics: TL 900, has 100' of frontage onto SW Greenburg Road, and will gain access via a proposed 30' wide driveway near the southern end of the Greenburg Road frontage. According to the Development Engineering Pre-Application Conference Notes, Tigard Municipal Code, (TMC) Section 18.705, (Access and Egress), requires a second access if the proposed number of dwelling units is between 50-100 units. (See Table 18.705.2) The Engineering Dept. in their Pre-Application Conference comments recognize that multiple accesses are not possible at this location, due to the site's narrow frontage and existing development on surrounding properties. To that end, the applicant has hired Lancaster Engineering to prepare evidence and documentation for an Adjustment to the multiple access standard as set forth in Chapter 18.705. (See enclosed Lancaster Engineering Traffic and Parking Analysis) As will be discussed in greater detail later in this application narrative, the applicant can provide the required number of tenant parking spaces, but not all of the guest parking spaces. As described on page 8 of this narrative, the applicant is providing 94 tenant/ADA parking spaces and a total of 99 are required, because the site must provide an additional 15% of guest parking spaces. Of the total 94 spaces, 47 spaces will be compact and 47 will be standard, (ADA spaces are in fact standard in size), which complies with the maximum ratio of 50% standard and 50% compact as required by 2 18.765.070. Lancaster Engineering in their Technical Memorandum submits evidence and documentation for an Adjustment to the required number of parking spaces as set forth under Chapter 18.765. (See enclosed 2014 Lancaster Technical Memorandum and 3/25/15 Addendum) Lancaster Engineering recommends additional bicycles parking as a off-setting factor for the requested reduced guest parking. As set forth under Table 18.765.2, bicycle spaces for Multifamily units are calculated at a rate of one space for every two dwelling units. Therefore, as applied to this case, 33 bicycle parking spaces are required for the 63 unit complex, and 51 are provided, which exceeds the minimum bicycle parking requirement. As stated on page 3 of the 3/25/15 Lancaster Engineering Addendum, Todd Mobley, PE states the following: "The development plan includes more bicycle parking than is required by City of Tigard code. In fact, interior bike parking, in the form of wall-hung bike spaces, are proposed in 25 percent of the dwelling units. This results in a total of 35 exterior bike spaces and 16 interior bike spaces, offering strong encouragement for bicycling. " The subject site is generally flat and slopes slightly at 2% from Greenburg Road to the rear property line. 3. Surrounding Planning, Zoning and Land Use: Lands directly to the north and south are zoned MUE-I. Those lots are occupied with a multifamily development, a church and a pastor's residence. Lands south and east of the MUE-1 land are zoned R-12), and occupied with a mix of single family and multifamily development. Single family homes within unincorporated Washington County abut the eastern property line. Existing offices and commercial development, (zoned MUE,-1), occupy the lots abutting the intersection of Greenburg Road and Greenburg Street, and Greenburg Road and Lehman Street. Washington Square, (zoned MUC), in across Greenburg Road from the subject site. (See enclosed zoning map) IV. JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST: The following narrative is intended to justify the applicant's request, and to demonstrate compliance with all applicable and relevant City of Tigard Community Development Code (CDC)requirements related to the request. 18.360 Site Development Review 18.360.030Approval Process A. New developments and major modifications. Site development review for a new development or major modification of an approved plan or existing development, as defined in Section 18.360.020.A, shall be processed by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.360.090. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The subject request is defined as new development, therefore, the applicant will address the relevant applicable approval criteria contained in Section 18.360.090 later in this application narrative. 18.360.070 Submission Requirements B. Additional information. In addition to the submission requirements required in Chapter 18.390, Decision-Making Procedures, an application for the conceptual development plan must include the following additional information in graphic, tabular and/or narrative form. The director shall provide a list of the specific information to be included in each of the following: 3 1. An existing site conditions analysis; 2. A site plan; 3. A grading plan; 4. A landscape plan; 5. An urban forestry plan consistent with Chapter 18.790; 6. Architectural elevations of all structures; and 7. A copy of all existing and proposed restrictions or covenants. (Ord. 12-09§1) APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed Builders Design's plans Sheets 1-15 and Western Design Group's landscape plans, Sheets L1-L4, the applicant has included in graphic form the required site plan, grading plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations in compliance with this criterion. 18.360.090 Approval Criteria The director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving,approving with conditions, or denying an application: A. Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title, including Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Standards; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: In the introduction portion of this application narrative,the applicant has listed all relevant and applicable zoning code standards for this request. That list is the same list that appears in the Pre- Application Conference Notes. (See enclosed Pre-Application Conference notes) Later in this application narrative the applicant will provide evidence to demonstrate compliance with all relevant and applicable zoning code standards for this request. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. C. Exterior elevations 1. Along the vertical face of single-family attached and multiple family structures offsets shall occur at a minimum of every 30 feet by providing any two of the following: a. Recesses, e.g., decks,patios, entrances,floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet; b. Extensions, e.g., decks, patios, entrances, floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet, a maximum length of an overhang shall be 25 feet; and c. Offsets or breaks in roof elevations of three or more feet in height. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has included Builders Design plans, which show a to- scale street scape of all of the proposed multifamily units. (See Sheets 8-18) That street-scape shows that a front facade off-set occurs approximately every 5' to 7' feet along the front facade. On all building elevation Sheets 8-18, the recessed offset may include a deck, patio or main entrance. There are gable ends that project perpendicular to the roof line and there is a break of 3' in the roof elevation across all of the banks of multifamily dwelling buildings. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 4 E. Private outdoor area -Multifamily use. 1. Private open space such as a patio or balcony shall be provided and shall be designed for the exclusive use of individual units and shall be at least 48 square feet in size with a minimum width dimension of four feet; and a. Balconies used for entrances or exits shall not be considered as open space except where such exits or entrances are for the sole use of the unit, and b. Required open space may include roofed or enclosed structures such as a recreation center or covered picnic area; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed Sheet I and Sheets 8-18 of the Builders Design plans, all of the proposed first floor dwelling units have patios and all of the second and third story units have balconies. The proposed patios are at least 48 square foot in size with a minimum dimension of 4', and the balconies are at least 48 square feet with a minimum dimension of 4'. This criterion has been met based on the evidence presented above. 2. Wherever possible, private outdoor open spaces should be oriented toward the sun; and APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Sheet 1 of the builders Design plans, all of the proposed units along the site's southern border will have their patios and balconies facing south towards the sun. The building closest to Greenburg Road will have their patios and balconies facing east towards the morning sun. This criterion has been met based on the evidence presented above. 3. Private outdoor spaces shall be screened or designed to provide privacy for the users of the space. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: All of proposed ground floor units within the complex will have fences surrounding their private outdoor space and the second and third story balconies are designed to provide privacy for the users of the space. (Note that fences are not shown on Sheet I of the Builders Design plans) The proposal can comply with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. E Shared outdoor recreation areas-Multifamily use 1. In addition to the requirements of subsection E of this section, usable outdoor recreation space shall be provided in residential developments for the shared or common use of all the residents in the following amounts: a. Studio up to and including two-bedroom units, 200 square feet per unit; and b. Three or more bedroom units, 300 square feet per unit. 2. The required recreation space may be provided as follows: a. It may be all outdoor space; or b. It may be part outdoor space and part indoor space;for example, an outdoor tennis court, and indoor recreation room; or c. It may be all public or common space; or d. It may be part common space and part private; for example, it could be an outdoor tennis court, indoor recreation room and balconies on each unit; and e. Where balconies are added to units, the balconies shall not be less than 48 square feet. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Sheets 8-18 of the builders Design plans, all of the proposed 63 dwelling units are either one or two bedroom units, therefore a total of 12,600 square feet of shared outdoor area must be provided. The location of the proposed 13,133 square feet of shared outdoor area is shown on the builders Design plans. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 3. Shared outdoor recreation space shall be readily observable to promote crime prevention and safety. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: In all instances, the location of the shared outdoor recreation area is in clear view from the dwelling unit's doors, windows, patios and balconies that face toward those outdoor recreation spaces. Therefore, based on the above, the shared outdoor recreation space will be readily observable by residents to promote crime prevention and safety. J. Public transit. (See also Attached Impact Study) 1. Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to or within 500 feet of existing or proposed transit route; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The subject site is located on Greenburg Road,which is served by two Tri-Met routes: Route 76 and 78. Transit stops for both of those bus lines are located 250' NW of the site on SW Gormartin Lane within Washington Square, and 650' south of the site at the corner of SW Greenburg and Lehman. Based on the above, the subject site is within 500 feet of existing or proposed transit route in compliance with this criterion. 2. The requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: a. The location of other transit facilities in the area, and b. The size and type of the proposal; 3. The following facilities may be required after city and Tri-Met review: a. Bus stop shelters, b. Turnouts for buses, and c. Connecting paths to the shelters. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant contacted Tri-Met to see if they would be interested in any transit improvements at the subject site. As evidenced by their response in the file record, Tri-met is not interested, nor will they require any transit improvements for the subject site. 6 K. Landscaping. 1. All landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapters 18.745 and 18.790; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Western Design Group's plans, the proposed development provides perimeter and interior parking lot landscaping, buffer landscaping in the front and rear yards, and landscaping between and around the proposed apartment buildings. A more detailed discussion of the relevant and applicable standards of Chapters 18.745 and 18.790 will be presented later in this application narrative. (See pages 16 & 21) 2. In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections E and F of this section,a minimum of 20% of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped; and APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Western Design Group's plans, the proposed development provides 20% of the gross site area in perimeter and interior parking lot landscaping, buffer landscaping in the front and rear yards, and landscaping between and around the proposed apartment buildings. The proposal complies with this criteria based on the evidence presented above. 3. A minimum of 15% of the gross site area shall be landscaped. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design plans and Sheets L1-L5 of the Landscape Plans, the proposed development proposes that 10,915 square feet of gross site area will be landscaped, therefore 15.9%of the site will be landscaped in compliance with this criterion. L. Drainage. All drainage plans shall be designed in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant's Civil Engineer will provide preliminary drainage and grading plans for the subject development. The applicant's Civil Engineer has prepared those plans in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan. M. Provision for the disabled.All facilities for the disabled shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in ORS Chapter 447. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to the attached Oregon Structural Specialty Code, (OSSC) accessible parking requirements provided by Planning staff, the subject site's 94 parking spaces requires that 2 of those 94 spaces be accessible parking spaces. As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design plans, the proposed parking lot has two, ADA accessible parking spaces near the site's entry, and adjacent to the southern bank of apartment buildings. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the information provided above. N.All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title; e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350, or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. (Ord. 13-08§3; Ord. 12-09§1; Ord. 06-20; Ord 02-33 7 APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The subject site is located in the MUE-1 zone, therefore the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone are set forth under 18.520, (Commercial Zoning Districts), and more specifically contained under 18.520.030, (Permitted Uses), and the Use Table 15.520.1. With regard to 18.520.030, uses are separated into four categories: permitted, restricted, conditional and prohibited. According to Use Table 15.520.1., multifamily units, such as the proposal are an outright permitted use. Footnote #28 states that all permitted use are subject to Site Development Review as set forth under Section 18.630, and the applicant has provided evidence to demonstrate compliance with the relevant and applicable criterion in Section 18.630. Therefore, based on the above, the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.370.020 Adjustments 6. Adjustments to parking standards (Chapter 18.765) APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.765.2., multifamily dwelling units required the following parking space ratios based on the number of proposed bedrooms/unit: 1. 1.25 spaces/one bedroom unit 2. 1.5 spaces/two bedroom unit As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design plans, the proposal development will consist of the following types of dwelling units, and therefore will require the following number of parking spaces: 1. 33, one bedroom units X 1.25 spaces/one bedroom unit=41 parking spaces 2. 30, two bedroom units X 1.5 spaces/two bedroom unit= 45 parking spaces Total= 86 parking spaces According to 18.765.030(E), any multifamily dwelling unit project that has 10 or more required parking spaces must provide an additional 15% beyond the required parking spaces. Based on that fact, the proposed parking lot must provide an additional 13 spaces, for a grand total of 99 spaces. As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design plans, the development will provide the following number of parking spaces: 1. 2 ADA parking spaces 2. 47 compact spaces 3. 45 standard spaces Based on the above, the project proposes a total of 94 parking spaces, and 99 are required, therefore the applicant requests an Adjustment to reduce the number of parking spaces by 5%. Of the total 94 spaces, 47 spaces will be compact and 47 will be standard, (ADA spaces are in fact, standard in size), which complies with the maximum ratio of 50% standard and 50%compact as required by 18.765.070. As documented on pages 5 & 6 of the 4/7/14 Lancaster Engineering report, Todd Mobley, PE, has provided evidence to demonstrate compliance with the parking adjustment criteria as set forth under 18.370.020(C)(6). To summarize his evidence he states the following as justification for the adjustment: 8 A "The ITE Parking Generation manual has a methodology to calculate that the proposed development will have a total demand of 75 parking spaces v. the 94 proposed. A The site is well-served by transit, which is itself a mitigating factor to permit less required parking. A Based on the Walk Score results, the site scores high, (80 = very walkable), which also is a mitigating factor to permit less required parking. A 18.370.020(C)(6) allows up to a 20% reduction, and the applicant is requesting an 9% reduction, which is less than IA of the allowed reduction" In 2015, planning staff requested from Mr. Mobley further evidence in support of the requested parking adjustment. In his 3/25/15 Technical Memorandum Addendum, Mr. Mobley opines again as to why, based on substantial evidence already in the file record and in his 3/25/15 report, the requested parking adjustment should be granted: "This analysis is provided as a follow-up to discussion at our March 3rd meeting with Gary Pagenstecher at the City of Tigard. At the meeting, we discussed in detail the parking analysis that was provided in our original traffic analysis dated April 7, 2014. Specifically, we focused on the data in the Parking Generation Manual, Fourth Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Data in the manual represents actual, empirical data collected at apartment communities in the United States. It was noted that the manual includes data from Portland, Beaverton, Hillsboro, and from Vancouver, Washington. Despite the considerable amount of data demonstrating that the proposed parking would be sufficient, Mr. Pagenstecher was concerned that the code requires the "Use of transit, demand management programs, and/or special characteristics of the customer, client, employee, or resident population..." that will serve to reduce parking demand. Despite the considerable data presented, Mr. Pagenstecher was concerned that we had not adequately addressed the special characteristics that would support approval of the parking reduction. It is recognized that in the experience of the City of Tigard, parking deficiencies have been particularly problematic for apartment communities. However, this site is located in an urbanizing area and is less suburban in nature than many other areas in Tigard. As such, this neighborhood will be, on average, less automobile dependent, which leads to reduced parking demand. To demonstrate this reduction in demand, peak parking demand observations were made at the existing apartment community immediately north of the subject site. This neighboring apartment site is particularly relevant given its location and approximate size. It has a total of 52 dwelling units, compared to the 63 units currently proposed at the subject site. Consistent with the ITE Parking Generation manual, peak demand observations at the adjacent site were made during overnight hours. It was found that there were a total of 71 parked vehicles at the site. With the 52 dwelling units, this results in a peak demand of 1.37 parking spaces per dwelling unit. By comparison, City of Tigard development code requires a total of 99 spaces for the proposed 63 dwelling units on the subject site, or a ratio of 1.57 spaces per dwelling unit. The current development proposal is for a reduction of only five spaces to 94, which is a ratio of 1.49 spaces per dwelling unit. Data from the ITE Parking Generation manual results in a ratio of 1.13 spaces per dwelling unit. 9 In addition to the location of the site within an urbanizing area with excellent transit service, there are other considerations which are expected to result in a decrease in parking demand compared to other more auto-dependent sites in Tigard. These are as follows: 1. As explained in the original traffic analysis, this site has an excellent walking accessibility rating. This rating takes into account the proximity of transit as well as other attractors such as retail, services, schools, and parks. This high rating is a result of the site's location within a more dense and mixed-use area compared to other apartments in Tigard which may be more isolated in residential-only neighborhoods. 2. The development plan includes more bicycle parking than is required by City of Tigard code. In fact, interior bike parking, in the form of wall-hung bike spaces, are proposed in 25 percent of the dwelling units. This results in a total of 35 exterior bike spaces and 16 interior bike spaces, offering strong encouragement for bicycling." At the end of his 3/25/15 report, Mr Mobley concludes by saying that: "As demonstrated by the original traffic analysis and this addendum, the proposed parking on the site will be adequate to serve the development. Tigard code section 18.370.020.C.6.a allows a reduction of up to 20 percent based on the use of transit, demand management programs, and special characteristics. A reduction of only five spaces, or five percent is proposed. This is supported by transit availability, demand management in the form of added interior bicycle parking, and a demonstrated reduction in parking demand for apartment units adjacent to the site. Based on this overwhelming evidence in support, it is recommended that the proposed parking reduction be granted." Therefore, based on substantial evidence already in the file record, and in the 3/25/15 Lancaster Engineering report, the requested parking adjustment should be granted. 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts, (MUE-1 Mixed Employment District) 18.520.020 List of Zoning Districts APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.520.020 (G), the MUE-1 zone allows residential uses that are compatible with the employment character of the area. Typically, multifamily dwellings at a moderate to high dwelling density are located along transit streets, arterial streets near employment centers, (such as Washington Square and Lincoln Towers), that provide easy access to and from places of employment, or if employment is not local, then easy access to the regional freeway system, (such as Hwy 217), that will get employees to their places of employment. All of the above-mentioned factors are present at this location, therefore the proposed use of the subject site complies with this criterion. 18.520.030 Uses APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.520.1, (Use Table), multifamily units are a permitted use in the MUE-1 zone, therefore the proposed use of the subject site complies with this criterion. According to Table 18.520.2, (Commercial Zones), multifamily units must have a minimum height of two stories, a maximum height of 200', a maximum site coverage,(i.e. buildings and impervious surfaces), of 85%, a minimum landscape requirement of 15%, and a minimum residential density of 50 dwelling units/acre. The Greenburg Apartments will be three story dwelling units, whose buildings and parking lot occupy 10 84.1% of the site, with the remainder of the site in landscaping. (15.9%) According 18.715.020(A)(3)(b), the net developable acreage for multifamily development is calculated by deducting the gross acreage is accessways, which in this case is 14,414 square feet. Therefore, 1.572 acre, (68,481 square feet-14,414 square feet in accessways=l.24 acre) Therefore the subject site's minimum density is 1.24 acres X 50 dwelling units/acre=62 units, and the proposal is for 63 dwelling units. Therefore, based on the above, the proposal complies with the Commercial Development standards and thus complies with this criterion. 18.630 Washington Square Regional Center 18.630.010 Purpose and Applicability APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.630.01 OC, the following uses must comply with the Washington Square Design Standards: All new developments, including remodeling and renovation projects are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Washington Square Regional Center. The proposed Greenburg Apartments will result in a 63 unit apartment complex directly across the street from Washington Square, therefore the design standards of the Washington Square Regional Center do apply to this proposal. 18.630.020 Development Standards E. Adjustments to density requirements in the Washington Square Regional Center Plan District. The density requirements shown in Table 18.520.2 are designed to implement the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. These requirements apply throughout the Washington Square regional center zoning districts, but the city recognizes that some sites are difficult to develop or redevelop in compliance with these requirements. The adjustment process provides a mechanism by which the minimum density requirements may he reduced by up to 25% of the original requirement if the proposed development continues to meet the intended purpose of the requirement and findings are made that all approval criteria are met. Adjustment reviews provide flexibility for unusual situations and allow for alternative ways to meet the purpose of the code. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.520.2, (Commercial Zones), the minimum dwelling density for the MUE-1 zone is 50 dwelling units/acre, and there is no maximum dwelling density. Therefore, the minimum dwelling density is: 1.24 acres X 50 dwelling units/acre = 62 dwelling units. The applicants proposes 63 units, which exceeds the minimum required density. Earlier versions of the development proposal requested 66 units, which, at the time was the determined minimum number of units required to meet minimum density. The applicant's project team spent many months working with Planning staff and analyzing all development standards and development limitations that apply to this 11 site. The goal was to meet as many applicable development standards and development limitations as possible and at the same time acknowledging how difficult of a site it is to develop, due to its long, narrow and irregular shape, and only having one entrance in and out of the site. The applicant achieved the goal of meeting all relevant and applicable development standards and development limitations, but for two key items: 1) the required number of guest parking spaces, and 2) the required 20' rear yard setback. Earlier development schemes had proposed an 8' rear yard setback, based on the applicant's and Planning staffs determination that an 8' rear yard setback complied with Table 18.520.2. However, recent interpretation by senior planning staff determined that a 20' rear yard setback is required, because of the site's adjacency to Washington County residential zoned land that abuts the eastern, (rear) property line of the subject site. The applicant does not agree with this interpretation as to how the rear setback should be determined; however, the applicant did agreed that, based on staffs current interpretation, three of the proposed one-bedroom units were within the 20' setback and thus had to be removed to comply with Table 18.520.2. Planning staff also determined that the specific square footage in accessways can be deducted from gross site area to determine net developable acreage. The removal of three units, combined with the accessway square footage deduction results in dwelling density at the required minimum. 18.630.030 Pre-Existing Uses and Developments within the Washington Square Regional Center Plan District Mixed Use Districts A. Applicability. Pre-existing housing units in mixed use districts are permitted Conversion of pre-existing housing units to other uses is subject to the requirements of this chapter. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 18.760.040, uses prohibited and structures that would be nonconforming in any of the regional center mixed use zoning districts that were lawfully in existence at the time of adoption of the regional center mixed use districts are considered to be approved uses and structures. However,future additions, expansions, or enlargements to such uses or structures, shall be limited to the property area and use lawfully in existence at the time of adoption of this ordinance, February 22, 2002. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Currently, the subject site is vacant and consists of no structures. The only "use" that is pre-existing is a driveway apron and approach onto SW Greenburg that is apparently from some past use that no longer exists on the site. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the information presented above. 18.630.050 Site Design Standards A. Compliance. All development must meet the following site design standards. If a parcel is one acre or larger a phased development plan may be approved demonstrating how these standards for the overall parcel can be met. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010.C.2,governing criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Building placement on major and minor arterials. a. Purpose. Architecture helps define the character and quality of a street and can make a strong statement about the overall community and city at large. The placement and design of buildings provides the framework for the streetscape and defines the edges of the public right-of-way. Architecture and ground floor uses can activate the street, either 1? by its design presence or by those who come and go from it. At intersections, investing in building frontages can create gateways and special places that add to the character of the area. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheets 8-18 of the Builders Design plans, (Elevation Drawings), the one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road have articulated bay front windows on all three stories that front the street. New interior sidewalks and attractive landscape will draw visitors into the protected ground floor entry. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented. b. Standard. Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of all street frontages along major and minor arterial streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on major and minor arterial streets. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 8 of the Builders Design plans, the one-bedroom units and site landscaping along Greenburg Road occupy 50% of the frontage and the building is located at the public street intersection with Greenburg Road. The remaining 50% of the frontage is occupied with frontage landscaping and the only entrance into the subject site. 2. Building setback. a. Purpose. Buildings and investment in architecture is most conspicuous when it is visible from the street. The presence of buildings closely sited at the edge of the right-of-way creates an envelope for the street and a sense of permanence. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 8 of the Builders Design plans, the one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road have articulated bay front windows on all three stories that face out towards the street. New interior sidewalks and attractive landscape will draw visitors into the protected ground floor entry. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented. b. Standard. The minimum and maximum building setback from public street rights- of-way shall be in accordance with Table 18.520.2. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.520.2, the minimum front, side and rear setbacks are zero, subject to the specific qualifiers in footnotes # 20 and # 21. Footnote #20 states that the side and rear setbacks shall be 20' when,(as in this case), the MUE-1 zone abuts residential districts as shown in Section 18.510.020. Recent interpretation by senior planning staff determined that a 20' rear yard setback is required, because of the site's adjacency to Washington County residential zoned land that abuts the eastern, (rear) property line of the subject site. As shown on the enclosed zoning map, the adjacent zoning to the north and south is MUE-1, MUC to the west and Washington County zoning to the east. Section 18.510.020 lists a series of City of Tigard residential zoning districts,(e.g., R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R 4.5, etc.) that are not adjacent or near the subject site. Therefore the proposed 5' and 20' minimum side and rear setback are in compliance with this criterion. Footnote #21 states that the maximum front yard setback shall be 20'. Therefore the proposed 10' front yard setback is in compliance with this criterion. 13 • 3. Front yard setback design. a. Purpose. The front yard is the most conspicuous face of a building and requires special attention. Places for people and pedestrian movement helps create an active and safer street. Higher level of landscape anticipates a more immediate visual result. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As required by the Landscaping and Screening Standards as set forth in 18.745, the 10' wide Greenburg Road front yard will be landscaped to a "Type A" landscape standard, which consists of 10' of lawn and living ground cover. (See Sheets L1-L5 of the Landscape Plan) The proposed landscaping will allow places for residents to interact with people passing by, easy pedestrian from the complex to the street, and allows views into the complex to allow an active and safer street. In addition, all electric meters will also be screened from public view. b. Standard. For setbacks greater than 0 feet, landscaping,an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or access way. If a building abuts more than one street,the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to the applicable standard in paragraph 5 of this subsection A. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As stated above, the the Landscaping and Screening Standards as set forth in 18.745, the complex's front yard setback will 10' wide, and it will contain a 6' wide sidewalk between the street and the one- bedroom units along Greenburg Road. 4. Walkway connection to building entrances. a. Purpose. As density increases and employee and resident populations increase,it is expected that more people will move between businesses within the WSRC. Provisions should be made to encourage people to walk from business to business, and housing to business rather than use automobiles. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The Greenburg Apartments will contain a 6' wide sidewalk between the street and the one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road. (See Sheet 1 and 6 of the Builders Design Plans) In turn, that sidewalk will connect to a series of internal sidewalks that connect all units to each other. That internal sidewalk network, combined with the existing and proposed sidewalk network, will encourage people to walk from business to business, and housing to business rather than use automobiles. b. Standard. A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. This walkway must he at least six feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner adjacent to a public street. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 and 6 of the Builders Design Plans, all units will have a 6' wide walkway that connects the buildings main entrance to the existing sidewalk on Greenburg Road. The walkway will be paved with scored concrete. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented. 14 5. Parking location and landscape design. a. Purpose. The emphasis on pedestrian access and a high quality streetscape experience requires that private parking lots that abut public streets should not be the predominant street feature. Where parking does abut public streets,high quality landscaping should screen parking from adjacent pedestrian areas. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheets L1-L5 of the Landscape Plans, the proposed parking area will be screened from public view by the one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road, the landscape adjacent to those units, and additional frontage landscape opposite the driveway entrance. Based on the above, the proposed parking lot that abut Greenburg Road is not the predominant street feature in compliance with this criterion. b. Standard. Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. When buildings or phases are adjacent to more than one public street,primary street(s) shall be identified by the city where this requirement applies. In general, streets with higher functional classification will be identified as primary streets unless specific design or access factors favor another street. If located the side, parking is limited to 50% of the primary street frontage. When abutting public streets, parking must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 parking lot screen standard. The minimum depth of the L-I landscaped area is eight feet or is equal to the adjacent building setback, whichever is greater. All other site landscaping shall be landscaped to an L-2 general landscaping standard. The L-I and L-2 standards are more fully described in Section 18.630.090. (Ord 12-09§1) APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design plans, the proposed parking area is located behind the one- bedroom units along Greenburg Road and to the side of all other units within the Greenburg Apartments, therefore the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.630.060 Building Design Standards A.All new buildings constructed in the MUC, MUE and MUR zones within the WSRC shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.3 70.010.C.2, criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Ground floor windows. a. Purpose. Blank walls along the street frontage tend to be neglected, and are not pedestrian friendly. Windows help keep "eyes on the street" which promotes safety and security, and can help create a lively street frontage by displaying activities and products within the building. Lighting at night from ground floor windows also adds to the presence of activity and the sense that someone is home. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 8-18 of the Builders Design plans, all of the units within Greenburg Apartments have banks of windows on all of three floors that face the street, the parking lot, and common outdoor recreation areas. The only "blank wall" are those end walls of the southerly banks of apartments. The 15 complex will include night lighting (sheet 19). The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented. b. Standard. All street facing elevations within the building setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows,display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as the entire requirement is located at a building corner. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 8 of the Builders Design Plans, the ground floor one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road have articulated bay front windows that occupy 51% of the ground floor wall area. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented. 2. Building facades. a. Purpose. Straight,continuous, unarticulated walls lack interest, character and personality. The standard provides minimum criteria for creating a diverse and interesting street scape. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 8-18 of the Builders Design plans, all of the building's front facades have a combination of articulated bay front windows, projecting gable ends, projecting balconies and inset entries that create interest, character and personality. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. b. Standard. Façades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: (1) a variation in building materials; (2) a building off-set of at least one foot; (3) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (4) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 8-18 of the Builders Design plans, all of the building's front facades have a combination of articulated bay front windows, projecting gable ends, projecting balconies and inset entries that create interest, character and personality. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 3. Weather protection. a. Purpose. Weather protection is encouraged to create a better year-round pedestrian environment and to provide incentive for people to walk rather than drive. b. Standard. Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades,shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a 16 sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 8-18 of the Builders Design plans, all of the building's front entries are covered and protected from the weather. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 4. Building materials. a. Purpose. High quality construction and building materials suggest a level of permanence and stature appropriate to a regional center. b. Standard. Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than two feet. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 8-18 of the Builders Design plans, all of the building's exterior consist of high quality, window trim, gable end details and wider "belly band" trim to distinguish transitions between floors. None of the buildings will contain plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal. plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. S. Roofs and roof lines. a. Purpose. Roof line systems that blur the line between the roof and the walls of buildings should be avoided. This standard simply states that roofing materials should be used on the roof and that wall finish materials should be use on building walls. The premise is that future buildings in the WSRC should have a look of permanence and quality. b. Standard. Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown Sheet 8-18 of the Builders Design plans, all of the building's contain a true hipped roof with gable ends. Composition roof shingles will be used on all roof systems. The wall finish materials are incorporated into the gable ends. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 6. Roof-mounted equipment. a. Purpose. Roof top equipment, if not screened properly, can detract from views of adjacent properties.Also roofs and roof mounted equipment can be the predominant view where buildings are down slope from public streets. b. Standard.All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or 17 positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 8-18 of the Builders Design plans, there is no roof-mounted equipment that will be the predominant view from the parking lot, adjacent neighbors or Greenburg Road. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 18.630.090 Landscaping and Screening Applicable levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other subsections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. A. L-1 parking lot screen. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on public streets. The L-1 standard is in addition to other standards in other chapters of this title. The setback shall be a minimum of eight feet between the parking lot and a public street. L-1 trees shall be considered parking lot trees and spaced between 30 and 40 feet on center within the setback. All L-1 trees shall be a minimum of 372-inch caliper at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a three-foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Ground cover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheets L1-L5 of the Landscape Plans, the western end of the parking lot will be setback 25' from the Greenburg Road. The parking lot will contain the number of trees in compliance with this criterion. The interior parking lot landscape beds will contain shrubs and ground cover in compliance with this criterion. B. L-2 general landscaping. The L-2 standard applies to all other trees and shrubs required by this chapter and Chapter 18.745 (except those required for the L-1 parking lot screen). For trees and shrubs required by Chapter 18.745, the L-2 standard is an additional standard. All L-2 trees shall be 2/2-inch caliper at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. (Ord. 12-09§1) APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to the Pre-Application conference notes, based on a discussion with Planning staff, and a review of Chapter 18.745, the westerly front yard requires a Type "A" buffering and screening, and the easterly rear yard required a Type "C" buffering and screening. The Type "A" buffering and screening will consist of a 10' wide bed with lawn and living ground cover;the Type "C" buffering and screening will consist of an 8' wide bed with trees, shrubs and a 5' tall fence. (i.e. Option #2) The said trees, shrubs will be in compliance with this criterion. In addition, all electric meters will also be screened from public view. 18.705 Access/Egress/Circulation 18.705.030 General Provisions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The enclosed Builders Design and Western Design Groups plans are scaled plans that shows the location of the proposed driveways, existing paved width of Greenburg Street, and all other proposed 18 access improvements. Therefore the applicant is submitting an access plan in substantial compliance with 18.705.030 B. (See also attached Impact Study) E. Required walkway location. On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: 2. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multi family developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The Greenburg Apartments will contain a 6' wide sidewalk between the street and the one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road. In turn, that sidewalk will connect to a series of internal sidewalks that connect all units to each other. That internal sidewalk network will also connect to the common open space areas. 3. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum six-inch vertical separation(curbed)or a minimum three-foot horizontal separation,except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping,pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes,benches,bicycle racks, and sign posts,and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design plans, none of the interior and/or perimeter sidewalks crosses the parking lot. There is only one spot where the public sidewalk crosses the parking lot, and that is at the driveway access into the site. 4. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, other pervious paving surfaces, etc.Any pervious paving surface must be designed and maintained to remain well-drained. Walkways may he required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required path ways. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: All proposed sidewalks will be paved concrete in compliance with this criterion. H. Access management. 1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO (depending on jurisdiction of facility.) APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has included an access report prepared by Todd Mobley, PE of Lancaster Engineering, that verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance 19 and deceleration standards as set by Washington County and the City of Tigard. (See also attached Impact Study) I. Minimum access requirements for residential use. 1. vehicular access and egress for single family,duplex or attached single-family dwelling units on individual lots and multifamily residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Tables 18.705.1 and 18.705.2; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: TL 900 has 100' of frontage onto SW Greenburg Road, and will gain access via a proposed 30' wide driveway near the southern end of the Greenburg Road frontage. According to the Development Engineering Pre-Application Conference Notes, and this criterion, the proposed development requires a second access if the proposed number of dwelling units is between 50-100 units. (See Table 18.705.2) The Engineering Dept. in their Pre-Application Conference comments recognize that multiple accesses are not possible at this location, due to the site's narrow frontage and existing development on surrounding properties. To that end, the applicant has hired Lancaster Engineering to prepare evidence and documentation to request an adjustment to the multiple access standard as set forth in TMC Section 18.705. (See enclosed Lancaster Engineering report) In their 4/7/2014 report, Lancaster Engineering makes a compelling case for just one access, based on a detailed operational analysis of the proposed driveway's intersection with Greenburg Road, the limited frontage within which to place an access, and the limits that that frontage places on the site's ability to meet Washington County access spacing requirements. On page 6 of that report, Todd Mobley, PE, of Lancaster Engineering provided the following evidence in support of the requested single access into the subject site: "As shown in this traffic analysis, the transportation system is capable of accommodating the proposed residential development. The site access is projected to operate acceptably through the year 2016 with the addition of site trips from the proposed development. There is no need for an additional access to serve the site as the single point of access will operate acceptably. No operational or capacity mitigations are necessary or recommended." In summary, one access is proposed and one access is all that is needed to serve this site. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.715 Density 18.715.020 Density Calculation A. Definition of net development area. Net development area, in acres, shall be determined by subtracting the following land area(s)from the gross acres, which is all of the land included in the legal description of the property to be developed APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The site does not contain any site-specific constraining factors as set forth under 18.715.020, and, according to the Development Engineering Pre-Application conference notes, the applicant will be required to dedicate public ROW such that Greenburg Road will be 49' side at center line. According 18.715.020(A)(3)(b), the net developable acreage for multifamily development can be calculated by deducting the gross acreage is accessways, which in this case is 14,414 square feet. Therefore, the 1.572 acre site,(68,481 square feet-14,414 square feet in accessways=1.24 acres) Therefore the subject 20 site's minimum density is 1.24 acres X 50 dwelling units/acre=62 units, which is one less than the proposed 63 dwelling units. As set forth under 18.715.020.(A)(3), an applicant for multifamily development can allocate 15% of gross acreage for the purposes of a density calculation, but the applicant has elected to deduct actual square footage in access ways, which is permitted. B. Calculating maximum number of residential units. To calculate the maximum number of residential units per net acre, divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum number of square feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning district. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.520.2, (Commercial Zones), there is no maximum dwelling density: 63 dwelling units are proposed, therefore the proposal complies with this criterion. C. Calculating minimum number of residential units. As required by Section 18.510.040, the minimum number of residential units per net acre shall be calculated by multiplying the maximum number of units determined in Subsection B above by 80% (0.8). APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.520.2, (Commercial Zones), the minimum dwelling density is 50 dwelling units/acre, and there is no maximum dwelling density. Therefore, the minimum dwelling density is: 1.24 acres X 50 dwelling units/acre = 62 dwelling units The applicants proposes 63 units, which is one above the minimum required density. 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.725.030 Performance Standards 18.725.030 (A) Noise APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Washington Square and the busily traveled Greenburg Road are directly adjacent to the site. Commercial development occupies the intersection of Greenburg and Greenburg and Lehman and Greenburg. Therefore, traffic noise, noise from commercial development and the glare from parking lot lights already impact the subject site. Based on its location, the subject site has nearby office/commercial uses and a regional shopping mall that already creates more noise than a typical apartment complex will generate. Existing single family and multifamily development are on adjacent lots. This multifamily residential development will approve and permit commonly anticipated residential activities that exist on nearby lots, such as landscape maintenance, occasional entertainment of guests, recreation activities outdoors and raising of domestic (i.e. cats, dogs, etc.) pets. Therefore, the proposed residences will be surrounded by and adjacent to other residences that do not generate any significant amounts of noise beyond what is typically generated from residential activities. Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this 63-unit multifamily development within the MUE-1 zone will not generate significant amounts of noise beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. (See also attached Impact Study) 2i 18.725.030 (B) Visible Emissions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not create visible emission beyond what one might expect. (e.g. smoke from an outdoor barbeque, dust from a leaf blower, fumes from a lawnmower) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of visible emissions beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.725.030 C Vibrations APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not generate vibrations of the sort that this criterion aims to curtail. (e.g. heavy equipment operation, manufacturing uses) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of vibrations, because commonly accepted residential practices do not typically generate noticeable vibrations. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.725.030 (D) Odors APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not generate offensive odors beyond what one might expect. (e.g. applications of lawn fertilizers, pesticides, house painting, gasoline fumes from a lawnmower) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of odors beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.725.030 (E) Glare & Heat APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not generate glare and heat of the sort that this criterion aims to curtail. (e.g. highly reflective wall cladding, use of welding equipment, use of high-output outdoor security) Each individual unit may have outdoor lighting, but it will be the type of outdoor lighting typically found on most dwelling units. (e.g.,75W-100W bulb exterior fixtures) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of glare beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.725.030 (F)Insects and Rodents APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The Greenburg Apartments will have a communal area set aside for closed lid garbage cans for garbage disposal and recycling, which inhibit insect and rodents from scattering garbage around the yard areas. Most residents will not be allowed to create large piles of wood, debris, and grass clippings that would be attractive to insects and rodents. Therefore, based on the facts presented above, it is clear that most residents within this multifamily development will not create situations that are attractive to insects and rodents. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.745 Landscape & Screening Standards 18.745.020 Applicability 22 A. Applicability. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development that requires a Type I conditional use minor modification, a Type I site development review minor modification, any Type II land use review or any Type III land use review unless otherwise specified in any of the sections below. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: This process is a Type II Site Development review, therefore, according to 18.745.020 and the Pre- Application conference notes, the relevant standards of 18.745 applies to this request. 18.745.040 Street Trees B. The minimum number of required street trees shall be determined by dividing the linear amount of street frontage within or adjacent to the site (in feet) by 40 feet. When the result is a fraction, the minimum number of required street trees shall be determined by rounding to the nearest whole number. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The site has 100' of frontage along Greenburg Road. Based on the above, 3 street trees are required. As shown on Sheet LI-L5 of the Landscape Plans, three street trees are shown along the Greenburg Road frontage in compliance with this criterion. 18.745.050 Buffering and Screening APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to the Buffering Matrix Table 18.745.1,(contained within the Landscaping and Screening requirements), and based on a discussion with Planning staff, the proposed multifamily dwelling development must provide a 10' wide Greenburg Road front yard buffer that will be landscaped to a "Type A" landscape standard, which consists of 10' of lawn and living ground cover. The easterly rear yard requires a Type "C" buffering and screening, which consists of an 6' tall block wall and a 6' wide bed with trees and shrubs. (i.e. Option #3) The said block wall, trees, and shrubs will be in compliance with this criterion. 18.745.050 (E) Screening:Special Provisions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.745.050(E)(1)(a)(i-iv), parking and loading areas are required to be screened, and that that screening should screen the parking area from public view. In addition, the parking area landscaping must achieve a 30% tree canopy cover at maturity. As demonstrated by the submitted landscape plan prepared by Western Design Group, (see Sheets L1-L5), the parking lot is screened in substantial conformance with this criterion, and the planted trees will achieve a 30% tree canopy cover at maturity. According to 18.745.050(E)(2) and (4), refuse containers and storage areas must be screened by a wooden fence and landscaping to screen them from public view. As demonstrated by the submitted landscape plan prepared by Western Design Group, (see Sheets L1-L5), the refuse containers and storage areas are screened by a wooden fence and landscaping to screen them from public view. In addition, all electric meters will also be screened from public view. 2 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste & Recyclable Storage 18.755.110 Purpose and Applicability B. Applicability. The mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage standards shall apply to new multi-unit residential buildings containing five or more units and nonresidential construction that are subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition,for such uses. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The proposal is for a 63 unit apartment complex that is defined as a new multi-unit residential building, therefore the relevant and applicable criteria of 18.755 apply. 18.755.030 Materials Accepted Except as provided for in 18.755.040.E and I,the storage area must be able to accept at least all "principle recyclable materials" designated by the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and other source-separated recyclable the local government identifies by regulation. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures will be able to accept all "principle recyclable materials" as defined by DEQ and other source-separated recyclable that Tigard identifies by regulation. Based on the above, the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.755.040 Methods of Demonstrating Compliance A. Alternative methods of compliance. An applicant shall choose one of the following four methods to demonstrate compliance: 1. Minimum standards; 2. Waste assessment; 3. Comprehensive recycling plan; or 4. Franchised hauler review and sign-off APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has chosen the Waste Assessment method, therefore the relevant and applicable criteria as set forth under 18.755.040 (D) apply. D. Waste assessment method. 2. Typical application of method. This method is most appropriate when the specific use of a building is known and the type and volume of mixed solid waste to be generated can be estimated; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Evergreen Builders, LLC has had many years of experience building multifamily dwelling units in the Metro area, and they have real-time data on the estimated amount of solid waste/recycling that their tenants generated, how many trash enclosures are required for various sized apartment complexes and where those trash enclosures should be located. Evergreen Builders also has a trash/recyclers company 24 that services all of their developments. Based on above, the Waste Assessment method is the best fit for this development. 3.(a)(b)(c)Application requirements and review procedures. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Evergreen Builders, LLC understands that they must have a pre-conference with the solid waste coordinator, complete a solid waster assessment form and have the solid waster coordinator/plan check staff review and approved the waste assessment proposal. 18.755.050 Location, Design and Access Standards for Storage Areas A. Applicable standards. The following location, design and access standards for storage areas are applicable to all four methods of compliance, described in Section 18.755.040. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has chosen the Waste Assessment method, therefore the relevant and applicable criteria as set forth under 18.755.050 apply. B. Location standards. 1. To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures will contain co-located areas for solid waste and recycling with in each trash enclosure. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the facts presented. 2. Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with uniform building and fire code requirements. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures will be reviewed for uniform building code and fire code standard as part of the building plan review process. Both enclosures will be designed in conformance with the above-cited standards, and if required, any possible changes/modification to those trash enclosure will be made prior to the issuance of a building permit. (See enclosed trash enclosure detail) The proposal complies with this criterion based on the facts presented. 3. Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development. Therefore the storage area requirement are satisfied by using multiple locations in compliance with this criterion. 4. Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: 25 As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development. Therefore the trash enclosures are not located in the front yard setback and/or adjacent to a public or private street in compliance with this criterion. S. Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development. Therefore the trash enclosures are located in a central and/or visible location in compliance with this criterion. 6. Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in subsection C, design standards. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures are located within the landscape beds within center parking island and in the landscape bed in the NE corner of the development. Therefore the trash enclosures are taking up required parking spaces. The said trash enclosures will be screened in accordance with the provisions in subsection C, design standards. 7. The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development. Therefore the trash enclosures are located in areas that are easily accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. C. Design standards. 1. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures have dimensions consistent with other Tigard-area apartment dwelling complexes, where the standard enclosure size is 10' X 11' 4"'. (See attached plan sheet 6) 2. Storage containers shall meet uniform fire code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: '26 The two, proposed 10' X 11' 4"' trash enclosures will be made of concrete cinder block construction that will comply with uniform fire code standards. The enclosures will be covered with waterproof material in compliance with this criterion. 3. Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures will be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence. Gate openings will be provided that allow access to users and haulers. 4. Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures areas will contain labels that clearly state what type of materials are accepted within each container. D. Access standards. 1. Access to storage areas can be limited for security reasons; however, the storage area shall be accessible to users at convenient times of the day, and to collection service personnel on the day and approximate time they are scheduled to provide collection service. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: For security reasons, the two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures will be enclosed by a sight- obscuring fence, and the gate openings will be locked. However, those gates will be unlocked during daytime and early evening hours and locked during late evening/early AM hours. They will also be unlocked on the scheduled garage/recycling collection days. Z. Storage areas shall be designed to be easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment,considering paving, grade and vehicle access. A minimum of 10 feet horizontal clearance and eight feet of vertical clearance is required if the storage area is covered. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development. Therefore, the trash enclosures are located in areas that are easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment. Both of the trash enclosures will be covered. (See enclosed trash enclosure detail) 3. Storage areas shall be accessible to collection vehicles without requiring backing out of a driveway onto a public street. If only a single access point is available to the storage area, adequate turning radius shall be provided to allow collection vehicles to safety exit the site in a forward motion. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the two, proposed 10' X 11' 4" trash enclosures are located in areas where collection vehicles will not be required to back out of a driveway onto a public street, because the proposed trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development where vehicles can pull up the trash enclosure. 27 18.765 Off-street Parking& Loading Requirements 18.765.020 Applicability A. New construction. At the time of the erection of a new structure within any zoning district, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.765.020, developments that will result in the erection of new structures within any zoning district require off-street vehicle parking in accordance with Section 18.765.070. Approval of this request will result in the construction of 63 apartment dwelling units, therefore the relevant standards of 18.765 are applicable to this request. 18.765.030 General Provisions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.765.030 (B), Off-street parking spaces for multifamily dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwellings. As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the proposed parking lot is located on the same lot as the dwelling units in compliance with this criterion. As set forth under 18.765.030(E), Visitor parking in multifamily residential developments is required if the parking requirements result in more than 10 required parking spaces. In that instance, the applicant is required to provide an additional 15% of vehicle parking spaces beyond the minimum required for the use of guests of residents. As stated previously, the applicant has requested an Adjustment to these parking standards. The applicant can provide the required tenant parking but not all of the guest spaces. 18.765.040 General Design Standards APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.765.040 (B), the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation. On page 17 of this narrative, the applicant has provided evidence with regard to the access, egress and circulation standards as set forth in Chapter 18.705 and thus the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards As set forth under Table 18.765.2, bicycle spaces for Multifamily units are calculated at a rate of one space for every two dwelling units. Therefore, as applied to this case, 33 bicycle parking spaces are required for the 63 unit complex, and 51 are provided, which exceeds the minimum bicycle parking requirement. As stated on page 3 of the 3/25/15 Lancaster Engineering Addendum, Todd Mobley, PE states the following: "The development plan includes more bicycle parking than is required by City of Tigard code. In fact, interior bike parking, in the form of wall-hung bike spaces, are proposed in 25 percent of the dwelling units. This results in a total of 35 exterior bike spaces and 16 interior bike spaces, offering strong encouragement for bicycling. " A. Location and access. With regard to the location and access to bicycle parking: 1. Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: 28 As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, all bicycle parking areas are provided within 50 feet of primary entrances to all multifamily dwelling structures in compliance with this criterion. (See also attached Impact Study) 2. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, all bicycle parking areas are not within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways in compliance with this criterion. (See also attached Impact Study) 3. Outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, all bicycle parking areas are visible from on-site buildings and/or the street in compliance with this criterion. (See also attached Impact Study) B. Covered parking spaces. I. When possible, bicycle parking facilities should be provided under cover. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the subject is odd-shaped and thus it is a difficult site within which to provide all of the code-required number of dwelling units, open space, parking spaces, landscaping, screening and buffering. Given the underlying site's tight physical constraints, there was no practicable way to place all bicycle parking under cover. However, as stated above, 35 spaces will be outside, and 16 spaces will be interior, (i.e. "covered"), spaces. The operative phrase in this code criterion is "when possible", and as demonstrated above, it is possible to cover some, but not all, bicycle spaces on the subject site. 2. Required bicycle parking for uses served by a parking structure must provide for covered bicycle parking unless the structure will be more than 100 feet from the primary entrance to the building, in which case, the uncovered bicycle parking may be provided closer to the building entrance. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The proposal does include a parking structure, therefore this criterion does not apply to this request. C. Design requirements. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: I. The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee)parking is encouraged but not required; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: 29 The applicant is proposing bike racks that can be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. This is a residential development and not a commercial development, therefore the provision of long term employee bike lockers is not required. 2. Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant is proposing bike racks that can be securely anchored to the ground as shown on the enclosed site plan. 3. Bicycle parking spaces shall be at least two and one-half feet by six feet long, and, when covered,with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the applicant is proposing bicycle parking spaces that are at least two and one-half feet by six feet long. Each bicycle rack is a stand-alone, individual unit and not situated in rows, therefore there is no need to provide an aisle between rows of bicycling parking. 4. Each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet I of the Builders Design Plans, the applicant is proposing bicycle parking spaces that face outwards and towards the sidewalk, and each space is stacked next to each other, therefore each bicycle space is accessible without moving another bicycle. S. Required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The proposed bicycle spaces are for the use of tenants and guests and the applicant will not rent and/or lease those spaces to anyone. 6. Areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the areas set aside for bicycle parking spaces are adjacent to or at the end of sidewalks, or within 25% of the dwelling units. The spaces are not reserved for any other use other than bicycle parking. 30 D. Paving. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e.,pavers, asphalt, concrete, other pervious paving surfaces, or similar material. This surface must be designed and maintained to remain well-drained APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on Sheet 1 of the Builders Design Plans, the bicycle parking space areas are adjacent to or at the end of sidewalks, or within 25% of the dwelling units. Therefore they are situated on a hard surfaced material in compliance with this criterion. 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.765.2., multifamily dwelling units required the following parking space ratios based on the number of proposed bedrooms/unit: 1. 1.25 spaces/one bedroom unit 2. 1.5 spaces/two bedroom unit As shown on the Builders Design plans, the proposal development will consist of the following types of dwelling units, and therefore will require the following number of parking spaces: 3. 33, one bedroom units X 1.25 spaces/one bedroom unit=42 parking spaces 4. 30, two bedroom units X 1.5 spaces/two bedroom unit = 45 parking spaces Total = 87 parking spaces According to 18.765.030(E), any multifamily dwelling unit project that has 10 or more required parking spaces must provide an additional 15% beyond the required parking spaces. Based on that fact, the proposed parking lot must provide an additional 13 spaces, for a grand total of 99 spaces. As shown on the Builders Design plans, the development will provide the following number of parking spaces: 4. 2 ADA parking spaces 5. 47 compact spaces 6. 45 standard spaces Based on the above, the project proposes a total of 94 parking spaces, and 99 are required, therefore the applicant requests an Adjustment to reduce the number of parking spaces by 5%. Responses to the applicable and relevant Adjustment criteria have already been provided under 18.370.020 on pages 7-8 of this application narrative. 18.780 Signs APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has no specific plans for a free-standing sign within the front yard area along Greenburg Road. However, the applicant is aware that all applicable and relevant criteria of Chapter 18.780 when more definite plans are made for signage. 18.790 Urban Forestry Plan 31 18.790.020 Applicability APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.790.020(A)(6), the applicable and relevant Urban Forestry criteria apply to a Type II Site Development Review. 18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement A. Urban forestry plan requirements.An urban forestry plan shall: 1. Be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect (the project landscape architect) or a person that is both a certified arborist and tree risk assessor (the project arborist), except for minor land partitions that can demonstrate compliance with effective tree canopy cover and soil volume requirements by planting street trees in open soil volumes only; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed air photo map, the site does not contain any trees that will be required to be preserved or protected. As shown on Sheets Ll-L4 of the Landscape Plans, the applicant proposed to plant trees in the landscape and in the parking lot that will comply with the applicable standard percent effective tree canopy cover as set forth in Section 10, part 3, item N of the Urban Forestry Manual. (i.e. 33% effective tree canopy) Those trees will be planted by a licensed landscaper who has a certified arborist on staff. Therefore, the applicant asserts that the proposed tree planting does not need to be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect, but in fact can be accomplished by the firm hired to plant all site landscaping. 3. Meet the tree canopy site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual; and APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Western Design Group's plans, (see Sheets Ll-L4), the applicant proposed to plant trees in the landscape and in the parking lot that will comply with the applicable standard percent effective tree canopy cover as set forth in Section 10, part 3, item N of the Urban Forestry Manual. (i.e. 33% effective tree canopy) Based on the above, the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.795 Vision Clearance APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As documented in the enclosed Lancaster Engineering report, Todd Mobley, PE, the applicant's transportation engineer, has documented site distance at the proposed driveway intersecting point with Greenburg Road. Greenburg Road has a posted speed of 35mph, therefore there must be 350' of sight distance to the north and south. As shown in all exhibits and attachments contained in this application submittal, there are no apparent and/or existing obstructions that will block the view of traffic entering and exiting the subject site. Therefore, based on the above-stated facts, the proposal complies with 18.795. 18.810 Street& Utility Improvement Standards 18.810.020 General Provisions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.810.020, no development may occur and no land use application may be approved unless the public facilities related to development comply with the public facility requirements established in this section and adequate public facilities are available. Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements only when the required exaction is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development. As applied to this case, the City's Engineering Section has specified the frontage improvements required for this development. (See attached Pre-Application Conference notes) The proposal may require street improvements to Greenburg St., such as 34' of'A width pavement to the street, center line, curbing, a 10' wide sidewalk, street trees and street signs. The applicant will prepare development plans, prepared by a PE to show those improvements, if required. The applicant is also aware that there may be easements required to connect on-site storm water and sanitary lines to the above-mentioned storm water and sewer lines east and adjacent to the subject site. The applicant will show the said storm line and sewer line easements on the final version of the development plans. Therefore, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with this criterion based on the proposed development plans in the Builders Design plans. (See also attached Impact Study) IV. SUMMARY: Evidence presented in the application narrative, exhibits and attachments demonstrates that Adjustments to the second access requirement of 18.705 and the parking requirements of 18.765 are justified, given the site specific constraints that warrant these minor variations from the strict interpretation of these code requirements. All other aspects of the proposal meet the applicable zoning code standards, or can be met by the imposition of conditions of approval. V. CONCLUSION: This application has been submitted in accordance with the City of Tigard Municipal Code for a Type II Site Development Review with Adjustments to create the 66-unit Greenburg Apartments in the MUE-1 zone. Evidence has been presented to address all applicable sections of the Tigard Municipal Code and relevant policies and implementing strategies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, based on all the evidence presented in this application narrative, exhibits and attachments, this Site Development Review with Adjustments application should be approved. EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • Written Summary • Narrative S DR 2100- 0 :L VkRZotq - Ala VAR2OL4- 000 I I 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Trustee' s Deed • • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 mar o..a. o0l°S/?O120111:31PM 2U12-04di864 f I -0Th fowl.f h MON 31a.Ca SS=11400 Issas•Total.11Lae Gina Anne Johnnie ShutaOR 99773308 Address t b���I�017134652012604N164001004.1 1 Naar aII�� metrawtt i dw4.p �bossy lrcrswrwew.ar„ 4. ..• du—w..cry wrawatan .y RES-OR TIGARD,[,I,C Mammon on t'" •• a v.. 1,_,_ 730 NW 107 Avenue,Suite 400 �� Miami,FL 33172srsws..,Ntbantity onn.sOmar.� 'w Second Patty's Name and Address After recording,return to: Gina Anne Johnnie e tPN P.O.Box 2247 Salem,OR 97308 Until requested otherwise,send all tax statements to RES-OR TIGARD,(.LC 730 NW 107 Avenue,Suite 400 Miami,FL 33172 TRUSTEES DEED THIS MOEN-UR$Dated m "Z`j 2012,between Gina Anne Johnnie hereafter called successor trustee,and RES-OR TIGARD,LLC,a limited liability company herralter called the second party, WITNFSSETH: RECITALS: DOUGLAS C.HARNAR,as to an undivided 50%interest and CURTIS D.WALKER,as to an undivided 50%interest,as grantor.executed and delivered to Security Title Guaranty Co.,as Trustee,in favor of Silver Falls Bards,as Beneficiary,a certain trust deed dated February 12,2007,and recorded on February 13,2007 in the Washington Comity Official Records an Document No.2007-016749. Gas Anne Johnnie was appointed ae Successor Trustee by the Beneficiary byo an appointment octane[datedNcrNovember 18,201 I,and recorded on January 5,2012 in the Washington County Official Records as Documsmt No.2012-000440. In that trust deed,the real property therein and hereinafter described was conveyed by the grantor to the trustee to secure,among other things,the performance of certain obligations of the grantor to the beneficiary. The grantor thereafter defaulted inpa performance of the obligations secured by the trust deed as stated in the default hereinafter after mentioned,and such defauk stilt crated at the time of the sale hereinafter describednotice of By reason of the default,the owner and holder of the obligations secured by the treat deed,being the beneficiary therein named,or the beneficiary's successor in interest,declared all sums so secured immediately due and owing. A notice of default containing an election to sell the real property and to foreclose the taut deed by advertisement and sale to satisfy the asserting grantors obligation was recorded cc January 5.2012,in the Records of Washington County as Document No.2012-000441,to which refce.isc,.now is made. . . After recording the notice of default,the undersigned trustee gave notice of the time for place of sale of the real property,as fixed by the trustee and as required by law_ Copies of the notice of sale were served pursuant ORCP 7 D.(2)and 7 D.(3),or marled by both fit class and certified mail with return receipt requested,to the last known addresses of the person or their legal representatives,if any,named in ORS 86.740(I)and 86.740(2Xa),at least 120 days before the dale the property was sold. A copy of the notice of ask was mailed by fast class and untitled mail with return receipt requested to the Fast known aridness oithe fiduciary or personal reprsentative of any person named in ORS 86.740(1),promptly after the trustee received knowledge of the disability,insanity,or death of any six*presets- Copies of the nodes of sale were served upon occupants of the property described in the trust deed in die marmtr in which a summon,is served pursuant to ORCP 7 D(2)and 7D.(3)at last 120 days before the date the property was sold,pursuant to ORS 86.750(1). If the foreclosure proceedings were stayed and released from the stay,copies of an amended notice of sale in the form required by ORS 86.755(6)were mailed by registered or certified mail to the last known addresses of those persons listed as ORS 86.740 and 86.750(I)end to the address provided by each person who was present at the time and place set for the tale which was stayed within 30 days after the release from the stay. The trustee published a copy of the notice of sale in a newspaper of general circulation in each county bi which the real popery if situated once a week for funs successive weeks. The lac publication of the notice occurred more than twenty days prior to the date of sale. The railing,service and publication of the notice of rale are shown by affidavits and/or proofs of service duly recorded prior the date of sale hi the county records,those affidavit,and proofs,together with the Notice of Defeat and Election to Rem and the notice of sate,being now referred to and ineorponst d in and made a part of this deed as if fully set forth herein. The undersigned trustee has no actual notice of any person,other than the prism named in those affidavit's and proofs as having or claiming lien �fn r interest real stat un tory real property,entitkcd to notice pursuant to ORS 86.740(I Xb)or(t Xc). The Trustee IRR.by requirements of ORS 86.737 went complied with in a timely manner. The true and actual consideration for this conveyance I.$300,000.00. An agent of the undersigned trustee,on May 22,2012,at the hour of 10.00 o'clock,AM,in accord with the standard of time established by ORS 187.110,and at the place so fixed for sale,in MI accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon and pursuant to the powers conferred upon the trustee by the trust deed,sold the real property in one parcel al public auction to the sound pasty for the sum of S800,000.00,the second petty being the endhest best bidder at the sale,and that sum the highest and bat bid for the property_ cry) NOW THERF_FORP in consideration ofthau t sum so the is acknowledged,and the authority, the � Second o party r can;the receipt whereof by vested in the trustee by the laws of the State of Oregon and by the hit deed, Page I—TRUSTEE'S DEED • Title Data, Inc. FI POR10552 WN 2012045864.001 the trustee does hereby convey unto the second party all interest which dm grantor had or had the power to convey at the tine of grantor's execution of the trust deed,together with any interest the grantor or grantor's successors in interest acquired alter the execution of the trust deed in and to the following described real property,to-wit • Lot 5,Block i,L,EHMANN ACRE TRACT,in the City of Tigard,County of Washington and State of Oregon. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that tract conveyed to Westoai G.Carpenter by Deed recorded February 24,1972 in Book 855 page 529,Deed Records of Washington County,Oregon. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that tract conveyed to Gethsemane Evangelical Lutheran Church by Deed recorded April 25,1966 in Book 597 page 618,Deed Records of Washington County,Osegsn. ALSO EXLEP I THEREFROM that portion dedicated to the public in Dedication Deed recorded January 29,1987 as Fee No.87005001,Deed Records of Washington County,Oregon. AND FURTHER EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion dedicated to the public in Right of Way Dedication Deed recanted August 31,2000 as Fee No.2000070497,Deed Records of Washington County,Oregon. TO HAVE AND TO HOW the name web the second party and the second pangs heirs,successors in interest and assigns forever. In construing this instrument,meat,and whenever the contest so requires,the singular includes the plural: 'grantor'includes any successor In interest to the grantor,as well as each and every other person owing an obligation,the performance of which is secured by the hot deed;'trustee"includes any su r s.or trustee; 'beneficiary'includes any successor in interest of the beneficiary first named above;and"person'includes a corporation and arty other kgal or commercial entity. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned trustee has hereunto executed this document If the undersigned is a corporation,it has caused iti name to be signed and its scat,if any,affixed by an officer or any other person duly authorized to do so by order of its board actin-curs BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSONS RIGHTS,LE ANY UNDER ORS 195.300,195301 AND 195.305 TO 195336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO I I,CHAPTER 424,OREGON LAWS 2007,SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17,CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009,AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7,CHAPTER 8,OREGON LAWS 2010.THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OFTRE PROPERTY DESCRIBED tH THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WrTHTHE APPROPRIATE CITY OR • COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL,AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010,TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF TTE LOT OR PARCEL,TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES,AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930,AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS,IF ANY,UNDER ORS 195300,195301 AND 195305 TO 195336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO I I,CHAPTER.424,OREGON LAWS 2007,SECTI 2 TO 9 AND 17.CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009,AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7,CHAPTER 8,0 • N WS 2010. ma A Johan" tee STATE OF OREGON County of Marion This instrument was acknowledged before me on (Yl 6.4 Z`{,2012,by Gina Anne Johnnie,Successor Trotee_ 't .!sus OFFICIAL SEAL iu hcan- SARA E sAL0a0O j Notary Public for Oregon t( '`, ' NOTARYM ain -OREGON y M commission ores: 1 - I - Zo I -4 \,;® COMMISSION NO.44oes 'x y expires: ry MY COAWSSg0103,RfS JULY 01,2914 Page 2-TRUSTEE'S DEED • Title Data, Inc. Fl POR10552 WN 2012045864.002 -._. EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Impact Study • • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 BEDSAUL / VINCENT CONSULTING LLC • 416 Laurel Ave. #3 Tillamook OR 97141 Office: (503) 842.5391 brucevincent@embargmail.com Impact Study for a Type II Site Development Review to create the 66 unit Greenburg Apartments DATE: April 30th, 2014 (7/16/14 3rd Revision to address incomplete items) APPLICANT: Joe Westerman, Evergreen Builders, LLC 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 OWNER: Joe Westerman, Evergreen Builders, I,LC 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 APPLICANT' REPRESENTATIVES: (Planning) Bruce Vincent, Bedsaul/Vincent Consulting, LLC (Transportation Engineering) Todd Mobley, Lancaster Engineering • (Site Design) Brandon York, Builders Design, Inc. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax Lot 900, Map 1 S 1-26DC SIZE: 1.57 Acres ZONING: MUE-1 Mixed Use Employment District LOCATION: 9550 SW Greenburg Road 1. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Title 18: Development Code for the City of Tigard 18.390.040 & 050 Decision Making Procedures-Type II Procedure/Impact Study JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST: The following narrative is intended to justify the applicant's request, and to demonstrate compliance with all applicable and relevant City of Tigard Community Development Code (CDC)requirements related to an Impact Study as set forth under 18.390.040 & 050. 411 18.390.040 Type II Procedure A. Preapplication conference.A preapplication conference is required for Type II actions. • Preapplication conference requirements and procedures are set forth in Section 18.390.080.C. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has included, Pre-Application Conference Summary notes in the applicant's narrative evidence that the applicant did attended a Pre-Application conference and that all effected agencies commented on the request. Therefore the proposal complies with this criterion. B. Application requirements. 1. Application forms. Type II applications shall be made on forms provided by the director as provided by Section 18.390.080.E.1; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has included a signed application form as provided by the Director and in compliance with this criterion. 2. Submittal information. The application shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form; b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; c. Be accompanied by the required fee; d Include two sets of pre-stamped and pre-addressed envelopes for all property owners of record as specified in Section 18.390.040.C. The records of the • Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation are the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to produce the notice list; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has included the information requested on the application form and the required mailing address information as set forth under these criterion. Therefore the proposal complies with this criterion. e. Include an impact study. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet city standards and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the community development code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirements, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. • 2 APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The evidence provided in this Impact Study as set forth in the following responses. In addition to the • relevant and applicable criteria of 18.390.040 & 050, the applicant has included, by reference and made part of the applicant's narrative, applicant responses to applicable Title 18 criteria that provide evidence to demonstrate that the proposal will have minimal impact on the transportation system, public transit, access circulation, noise, vibrations, odors and the like. Therefore the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.390.050 Type II Procedure 18.390.050 B.Application requirements 18.390.050 B (2)(e.) Include an impact study. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirements, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development Transportation System & Bikeways • The subject site will be developed into a 66 dwelling unit apartment complex; therefore, the proposed development is projected to generate 34 peak AM trips, and 42 peak PM trips as per ITE Code 220,Trip Generation Manual, 9th edition. (See enclosed Lancaster Engineering Report) A trip is a one-directional vehicle movement. The peak hour is the one-hour time period when traffic volumes are the highest, and are the most critical measure of a development's impact on the transportation network. As per the Lancaster Engineering Report, 7 of the peak AM trips will enter the site and 27 will exit; the peak PM trips will be divided as 27 entering and 15 exiting. According to the Tigard Transportation System Plan, Greenburg Road is classified as a Major Arterial, which typically handles 5,000 to 10,000 or more average daily trips. According to Lancaster Engineering Report, vehicles entering and exiting the site, (i.e.,trip distribution), will be split roughly in half; 'A will proceed north on Greenburg Road, and use the stoplight at Hall Blvd. to proceed east or west on Hall Blvd, the remaining 'A will head south on Greenburg, and use the stoplight at Locust Street to proceed east on Locust, or proceed southward to the light at Greenburg and Hwy 217, which offers easy access to Hwy 217 approx 4/10 of mile south of the site. The Tigard Transportation System Plan also identifies transit travel along SW Greenburg Road. Accordingly, Greenburg Road has two bus lines, (#76 & # 78). According to the Lancaster Engineering Report, those bus lines offer service from 6:00AM to midnight with stops from 20 minutes to one hour. Therefore, based on the above, transit is readily available and convenient, which provides an easy alternative to vehicular travel by the future residents of the Greenburg Apartments. Therefore, based on the subject site's relatively low AM/PM peak hour trip generation, its easy access to transit and its frontage on a Major Arterial with a high carrying capacity, the site is ideally positioned to access streets that are designed to handle large volumes of traffic, and the occupants will not have to travel long distance on local streets to access high traffic volume streets. • 3 Water,Sewer, and Storm Systems, Parks The current site is served by an 8" water line in Greenburg Road. The site can also be served by an • existing an 8" sanitary sewer line and a 12" storm water line directly east and adjacent to the eastern property line of the subject site. (See attached storm drain plan and sanitary sewer plan) As noted on Greg Berry's 5/21/14 Public Facility checklist, the above referenced existing public sewer line will be extended to the SE corner of the subject site. The attached sanitary sewer plan shows the referenced public sewer line extension. Mr. Berry also notes that a public storm line connection must also be shown on the plans and attached storm drain plan shows that connection. The applicant is aware that there may be easements required to connect on-site storm water and sanitary lines to the above- mentioned storm water and sewer lines east and adjacent to the subject site.The applicant will show the said storm line and sewer line easements on the final version of the development plans. Based on the size of the existing utilities adjacent to the site and within Greenburg Road, it is unlikely that proposed Greenburg Apartments will have significant impacts on surrounding uses, given that the lines are appropriately sized to accommodate the surrounding commercial and residential uses. A central issue raised at the 3/10/14 neighborhood meeting was surface flow storm water runoff from the site to the SW 92"d St. dwellings whose rear yards that back up to the site's eastern border. As noted on Greg Berry's 5/21/14 Public Facility checklist, the applicant will be required to provide detention and identify the type of quality facilities. The applicant's engineer is in the process of designing an on-site storm water disposal system that will pick up all roof drain, parking lot runoff, pipe it to an underground storage facility, over-detain and clean storm water, and hold storm water flows to pre- development levels. The above-referenced engineered plans will be be included in the final version of development plans for the project. Based on the above-stated facts, the proposed Greenburg Apartments will not exacerbate the current neighborhood-wide storm water disposal situation. 40 There is a large playground at Metzger Elementary School, located off of Locust Street just south of the subject site, and Metzger Park is north of the site near the intersection of Hall Blvd. and Hemlock Street. The outcome of this request will add 66 new dwellings that will add a minor demand on the nearby open space and parks, but the incremental increase in demand is small in comparison to a large subdivision which is more likely to contain many more families with children. According to the owner, their one-bedroom unit do not attract families with children; similar one-bedroom apartments were often rented by single women and couples, who typically do not have children. Thirty-six of the 66 units will be one bedroom units, therefore over '/2 of the total units will not contain families with children that will put a demand on parks.As a rule, children and their families demand more park use, as compared to families without children.Therefore, it is likely that the increase in park/open space use will not significantly increase by approval of this multifamily apartment complex. Impact on affected private property owners Washington Square and the busily traveled Greenburg Road are directly adjacent to the site. Lands directly to the north and south are zoned MUE-1.Those lots are occupied with a multifamily development,a church and a pastor's residence. Lands south and east of the MUE-1 land is zoned R-12, and occupied with a mix of single family and multifamily development. Single family homes within unincorporated Washington County abut the eastern property line. Washington Square, (zoned MUC), in across Greenburg Road from the subject site. Therefore, the surrounding character of the neighborhood is one of higher density residential located close to office/commercial uses, with a regional shopping mall nearby that has already impacted the surrounding residential uses. Based on the character of the surrounding commerciallindustrial uses, it is unlikely that proposed • 4 development of the Greenburg Apartments will have significant impacts on surrounding uses, because presumably all surrounding uses are generating similar amounts of noise impacts, vehicle traffic • impacts and lighting impacts. As shown on the enclosed site plan, and as required by 18.360, (Site Development Review), and 18.745, (Landscaping and Screening), the subject site will contain perimeter setback landscaping, fencing, screening and buffering that will help to mitigate any impact that the development may have on adjoining neighbors. Noise,odor or glare Washington Square and the busily traveled Greenburg Road are directly adjacent to the site. Commercial development occupies the intersection of Greenburg and Locust. Based on the above, traffic noise, noise from commercial development and the glare from parking lot lights already impact the subject site. Based on its location, the subject site has nearby office/commercial uses and a regional shopping mall that already creates more noise than a typical apartment complex will generate. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: In addition to the relevant and applicable criteria of 18.390.040 & 050, the applicant has included, by reference and made part of the applicant's narrative, applicant responses to applicable Title 18 criteria that provide evidence to demonstrate that the proposal will have minimal impact on the transportation system, public transit, access circulation, noise, vibrations, odors and the like. 18.360.090 Approval Criteria The director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving,approving with conditions, or denying an application: J. Public transit. (See also Attached Impact Study) • 1. Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to or within 500 feet of existing or proposed transit route; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The subject site is located on Greenburg Road,which is served by two Tri-Met routes: Route 76 and 78. Transit stops for both of those bus lines are located 250' NW of the site on SW Gormartin Lane within Washington Square, and 650' south of the site at the corner of SW Greenburg and Lehman. Based on the above, the subject site is within 500 feet of existing or proposed transit route in compliance with this criterion. 2. The requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: a. The location of other transit facilities in the area, and b. The size and type of the proposal; 3. The following facilities may be required after city and Tri-Met review: a. Bus stop shelters, b. Turnouts for buses, and c. Connecting paths to the shelters. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: • 5 The applicant contacted Tri-Met to see if they would be interested in any transit improvements at the subject site. As evidenced by their response in the file record, Tri-met is not interested, nor will they • require any transit improvements for the subject site. 18.705 Access/Egress/Circulation 18.705.030 General Provisions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The enclosed site plan is a scaled plan that shows the location of the proposed driveways, existing paved width of Greenburg Street, and all other proposed access improvements. Therefore the applicant is submitting an access plan in substantial compliance with 18.705.030 B. H. Access management. 1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO (depending on jurisdiction of facility.) APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has included an access report prepared by Todd Mobley, PE of Lancaster Engineering, that verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by Washington County and the City of Tigard. I. Minimum access requirements for residential use. 1.Vehicular access and egress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwelling • units on individual lots and multifamily residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Tables 18.705.1 and 18.705.2; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: TL 900 has 100' of frontage onto SW Greenburg Road, and will gain access via a proposed 30' wide driveway near the southern end of the Greenburg Road frontage. According to the Development Engineering Pre-Application Conference Notes, and this criterion, the proposed development requires a second access if the proposed number of dwelling units is between 50-100 units. (See Table 18.705.2) The Engineering Dept. in their Pre-Application Conference comments recognize that multiple accesses are not possible at this location, due to the site's narrow frontage and existing development on surrounding properties. To that end, the applicant has hired Lancaster Engineering to prepare evidence and documentation to request an adjustment to the multiple access standard as set forth in TMC Section 18.705. In their report, Lancaster Engineering makes a compelling case for just one access, based on a detailed operational analysis of the proposed driveway's intersection with Greenburg Road, the limited frontage within which to place an access, and the limits that that frontage places on the site's ability to meet Washington County access spacing requirements. In summary, one access is proposed and one access is all that is needed to serve this site. 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.725.030 Performance Standards 18.725.030 (A) Noise APPLICANT'S COMMENT: • 6 Washington Square and the busily traveled Greenburg Road are directly adjacent to the site. Commercial development occupies the intersection of Greenburg and Greenburg and Lehman and • Greenburg. Therefore, traffic noise,noise from commercial development and the glare from parking lot lights already impact the subject site. Based on its location, the subject site has nearby office/commercial uses and a regional shopping mall that already creates more noise than a typical small subdivision will generate. Existing single family and multifamily development are on adjacent lots. This multifamily residential development will approve and permit commonly anticipated residential activities that exist on nearby lots, such as landscape maintenance, occasional entertainment of guests, recreation activities outdoors and raising of domestic pets. (i.e. cats, dogs, etc.) Therefore, the proposed residences will be surrounded by and adjacent to other residences that do not generate any significant amounts of noise beyond what is typically generated from residential activities. Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this 66-unit multifamily development within the MUE-1 zone will not generate significant amounts of noise beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. 18.725.030(B) Visible Emissions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not create visible emission beyond what one might expect. (e.g. smoke from an outdoor barbeque, dust from a leaf blower, fumes from a lawnmower) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of visible emissions beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. 18.725.030 C Vibrations • APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not generate vibrations of the sort that this criterion aims to curtail. (e.g. heavy equipment operation, manufacturing uses) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of vibrations,because commonly accepted residential practices do not typically generate noticeable vibrations. 18.725.030(D) Odors APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not generate offensive odors beyond what one might expect. (e.g. applications of lawn fertilizers, pesticides, house painting, gasoline fumes from a lawnmower) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of odors beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. 18.725.030(E) Glare& Heat APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not generate glare and heat of the sort that this criterion aims to curtail. (e.g. highly reflective wall cladding, use of welding equipment, use of high-output outdoor security) Each individual unit may have outdoor lighting, but it will be the type of outdoor lighting typically found on most dwelling units. (e.g.,75W 100W bulb • 7 exterior fixtures) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of glare beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned • areas. 18.725.030 (F)Insects and Rodents APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The Greenburg Apartments will have a communal area set aside for closed lid garbage cans for garbage disposal and recycling, which inhibit insect and rodents from scattering garbage around the yard areas. Most residents will not be allowed to create large piles of wood, debris, and grass clippings that would be attractive to insects and rodents. Therefore, based on the facts presented above, it is clear that most residents within this multifamily development will not create situations that are attractive to insects and rodents. 18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards A. Location and access. With regard to the location and access to bicycle parking: 1. Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed site plan, all bicycle parking areas are provided within 50 feet of primary entrances to all multifamily dwelling structures in compliance with this criterion. 2. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: • As shown on the enclosed site plan, all bicycle parking areas are not within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways in compliance with this criterion. 3. Outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed site plan, all bicycle parking areas are visible from on-site buildings and/or the street in compliance with this criterion. 18.810 Street& Utility Improvement Standards 18.810.020 General Provisions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.810.020, no development may occur and no land use application may be approved unless the public facilities related to development comply with the public facility requirements established in this section and adequate public facilities are available. Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements only when the required exaction is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development.As applied to this case, the City's Engineering Section has specified the frontage improvements required for this development. (See attached Pre-Application Conference notes) The proposal may require street improvements to Greenburg St., such as 34' of'A width pavement to the street, center line, curbing, a 10' wide sidewalk, • 8 street trees and street signs. The applicant will prepare development plans, prepared by a PE to show those improvements, if required. Therefore, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with this • criterion based on the enclosed development plans. • • 9 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Written Summary • Narrative • • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 BEDSAUL / VINCENT CONSULTING LLC • 416 Laurel Ave. #3 Tillamook OR 97141 Office: (503) 842.5391 brucevincent@embarcimail.com DATE: April 4th, 2014 (8/11/14 3rd Revision to address TVFR turnaround) REQUEST: Type II Site Development Review with Adjustments to parking and access spacing to create the 66 unit Greenburg Apartments, (eight, three story multifamily structures with 23 garages), in the MUE-1 zone APPLICANT: Joe Westerman, Evergreen Builders, LLC 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 OWNER: Joe Westerman, Evergreen Builders, LLC 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 • APPLICANT' REPRESENTATIVES: (Planning) Bruce Vincent, Bedsaul/Vincent Consulting, LLC (Transportation Engineering) Todd Mobley, Lancaster Engineering (Site Design) Brandon York, Builders Design, Inc. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax Lot 900, Map 1 S 1-26DC SIZE: 1.57 Acres ZONING: MUE-1 Mixed Use Employment District LOCATION: 9550 SW Greenburg Road I. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Title 18: Development Code for the City of Tigard 18.360.030&.090 Site Development Review 18.370.020 Variances/Adjustments 18.390.050 Decision Making Procedures-Type II Procedure/Impact Study (See Attached Impact Study as part of the entire submittal package) • 1 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts, (MUE-1 Mixed Employment District) 18.630 Washington Square Regional Center • 18.705 18.715 Access/Egress/Circulation Density 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.745 Landscape &Screening Standards 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste &Recyclable Storage 18.765 Off-street Parking& Loading Requirements 18.780 Signs 18.790 Urban Forestry Plan 18.795 Vision Clearance 18.810 Street& Utility Improvement Standards II. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS 1. City of Tigard: - Department of Community Development - Department of Police - Department of Engineering 2. TVFR 3. Washington County Dept. of Land Use and Transportation III. BACKGROUND FACTS 1. On-Site Land Uses:• The 1.57 Acre site is currently vacant and contains no structures. There are no trees within the area subject to development; all trees are"line trees" along the site's northern and southern borders. (See enclosed air photo site map) 2. Site Characteristics: TL 900, has 100' of frontage onto SW Greenburg Road, and will gain access via a proposed 30' wide driveway near the southern end of the Greenburg Road frontage. According to the Development Engineering Pre-Application Conference Notes, Tigard Municipal Code, (TMC) Section 18.705, (Access and Egress), requires a second access if the proposed number of dwelling units is between 50-100 units. (See Table 18.705.2) The Engineering Dept. in their Pre-Application Conference comments recognize that multiple accesses are not possible at this location, due to the site's narrow frontage and existing development on surrounding properties. To that end, the applicant has hired Lancaster Engineering to prepare evidence and documentation for an Adjustment to the multiple access standard as set forth in Chapter 18.705. (See enclosed Lancaster Engineering Traffic and Parking Analysis) As will be discussed in greater detail later in this application narrative,the applicant can provide the required number of tenant parking spaces, but not all of the guest parking spaces. As described on page 8 of this narrative, the applicant is providing 90 tenant/ADA parking spaces and a total of 104 are required, because the site must provide an additional 15% of guest parking spaces. Of the total 90 spaces, 43 spaces will be compact and 43 will be standard, which complies with the maximum ratio of 50% standard and 50% compact as required by 18.765.070. Lancaster Engineering in their 111 2 report submits evidence and documentation for an Adjustment to the required number of parking spaces as set forth under Chapter 18.765. (See enclosed Lancaster report) • The subject site is generally flat and slopes slightly at 2% from Greenburg Road to the rear property line. 3. Surrounding Planning, Zoning and Land Use: Lands directly to the north and south are zoned MUE-1. Those lots are occupied with a multifamily development, a church and a pastor's residence. Lands south and east of the MUE-1 land are zoned R-12), and occupied with a mix of single family and multifamily development. Single family homes within unincorporated Washington County abut the eastern property line. Existing offices and commercial development, (zoned MUE-1), occupy the lots abutting the intersection of Greenburg Road and Greenburg Street, and Greenburg Road and Lehman Street. Washington Square, (zoned MUC), in across Greenburg Road from the subject site. (See enclosed zoning map) IV. JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST: The following narrative is intended to justify the applicant's request, and to demonstrate compliance with all applicable and relevant City of Tigard Community Development Code (CDC) requirements related to the request. 18.360 Site Development Review 18.360.030 Approval Process A. New developments and major modifications. Site development review for a new development or major modification of an approved plan or existing development, as defined in Section 18.360.020.A, shall be processed by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using • approval criteria contained in Section 18.360.090. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The subject request is defined as new development, therefore, the applicant will address the relevant applicable approval criteria contained in Section 18.360.090 later in this application narrative. 18.360.070 Submission Requirements B. Additional information. In addition to the submission requirements required in Chapter 18.390, Decision-Making Procedures, an application for the conceptual development plan must include the following additional information in graphic, tabular and/or narrative form. The director shall provide a list of the specific information to be included in each of the following: 1. An existing site conditions analysis; 2. A site plan; 3. A grading plan; 4. A landscape plan; S. An urban forestry plan consistent with Chapter 18.790; 6. Architectural elevations of all structures; and 7. A copy of all existing and proposed restrictions or covenants. (Ord 12-09§1) • 3 APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed Builders Design's plans and Western Design Group's landscape plans, the applicant has included in graphic form the required site plan, grading plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations in compliance with this criterion. 18.360.090 Approval Criteria The director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving,approving with conditions, or denying an application: A. Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title, including Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Standards; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: In the introduction portion of this application narrative,the applicant has listed all relevant and applicable zoning code standards for this request. That list is the same list that appears in the Pre- Application Conference Notes. (See enclosed Pre-Application Conference notes) Later in this application narrative the applicant will provide evidence to demonstrate compliance with all relevant and applicable zoning code standards for this request. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. C. Exterior elevations 1. Along the vertical face of single-family attached and multiple family structures offsets shall occur at a minimum of every 30 feet by providing any two of the following: a. Recesses, e.g., decks,patios, entrances,floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet; • b. Extensions, e.g., decks, patios, entrances, floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet, a maximum length of an overhang shall be 25 feet;and c. Offsets or breaks in roof elevations of three or more feet in height. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has included Builders Design plans, which show a to-scale street scape of all of the proposed multifamily units. That street-scape shows that a front facade off-set occurs approximately every 5' to 7' feet along the front facade. On all elevations, the recessed offset may include a deck,patio or main entrance. There are gable ends that project perpendicular to the roof line and there is a break of 3' in the roof elevation across all of the banks of multifamily dwelling buildings. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. E. Private outdoor area-Multifamily use. 1. Private open space such as a patio or balcony shall be provided and shall be designed for the exclusive use of individual units and shall be at least 48 square feet in size with a minimum width dimension of four feet;and a. Balconies used for entrances or exits shall not be considered as open space except where such exits or entrances are for the sole use of the unit, and b. Required open space may include roofed or enclosed structures such as a recreation center or covered picnic area; • 4 . V.�W� APPLICANT'S COMMENT: '''. As shown on the enclosed Builders Design plans, all of the proposed first floor dwelling units have fillpatios and all of the second and third story units have balconies. The proposed patios are at least 48 square foot in size with a minimum dimension of 4', and the balconies are at least 48 square feet with a minimum dimension of 4'. This criterion has been met based on the evidence presented above. 2. Wherever possible, private outdoor open spaces should be oriented toward the sun; and APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Builder Design plans, all of proposed unit along the site's southern border will have their patios and balconies facing south towards the sum The building closest to Greenburg Road will have their patios and balconies facing east towards the morning sun. This criterion has been met based on the evidence presented above. 3. Private outdoor spaces shall be screened or designed to provide privacy for the users of the space. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Builder Design plans, all of proposed ground floor units within the complex have fences surrounding their private outdoor space and the second and third story balconies are designed to provide privacy for the users of the space. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. E Shared outdoor recreation areas-Multifamily use 1. In addition to the requirements of subsection E of this section, usable outdoor recreation space shall be provided in residential developments for the shared or common use of all the • residents in the following amounts: a. Studio up to and including two-bedroom units, 200 square feet per unit;and b. Three or more bedroom units, 300 square feet per unit. 2. The required recreation space may be provided as follows: a. It may be all outdoor space;or b. It may be part outdoor space and part indoor space;for example, an outdoor tennis court, and indoor recreation room; or c. It may be all public or common space; or d It may be part common space and part private; for example, it could be an outdoor tennis court, indoor recreation room and balconies on each unit; and e. Where balconies are added to units, the balconies shall not be less than 48 square feet. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Builder Design plans, all of the proposed 66 dwelling units are either one or two bedroom units, therefore a total of 13,200 square feet of shared outdoor area must be provided. The location of the proposed 13,669 square feet of shared outdoor area is shown on the Builder Design plans. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 4.41/ _15 /4 s (1. 0 " 18 w5 r °,'tea z 7~e74L 3) 2. In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections E and F of this section,a minimum of 20% of the gross area including parking, loading and service • areas shall be landscaped; and APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Western Design Group's plans, the proposed development provides 20% of the gross site area in perimeter and interior parking lot landscaping, buffer landscaping in the front and rear yards, and landscaping between and around the proposed apartment buildings. The proposal complies with this criteria based on the evidence presented above. 3. A minimum of 15% of the gross site area shall be landscaped. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Builders Design plans, the proposed development provides 15.3% of gross site area is landscaped,therefore the proposal complies with this criterion. L. Drainage. All drainage plans shall be designed in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant's Civil Engineer will provide preliminary drainage and grading plans for the subject development. The applicant's Civil Engineer has prepared those plans in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan. M. Provision for the disabled.All facilities for the disabled shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in ORS Chapter 447. • APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to the attached Oregon Structural Specialty Code, (OSSC) accessible parking requirements provided by Planning staff, the subject site's 90 parking spaces requires that 4 of those 94 spaces be accessible parking spaces. As shown on the Builders Design plans, the proposed parking lot provides those five ADA accessible parking spaces near the site's entry, and adjacent to the southern bank of apartment buildings. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the information provided above. N.All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title; e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350, or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. (Ord 13-08§3; Ord. 12-09§1; Ord. 06-20; Ord. 02-33 APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The subject site is located in the MUE-1 zone, therefore the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone are set forth under 18.520, (Commercial Zoning Districts), and more specifically contained under 18.520.030, (Permitted Uses), and the Use Table 15.520.1. With regard to 18.520.030, uses are separated into four categories: permitted, restricted, conditional and prohibited. According to Use Table 15.520.1.,multifamily units, such as the proposal are an outright permitted use. Footnote #28 states that all permitted use are subject to Site Development Review as set forth under Section 18.630, and the applicant has provided evidence to demonstrate compliance with the relevant and applicable criterion in Section 18.630. Therefore, based on the above, the proposal complies with this criterion. • 7 18.370.020 Adjustments 6. Adjustments to parking standards (Chapter 18.765). 41) APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.765.2., multifamily dwelling units required the following parking space ratios based on the number of proposed bedrooms/unit: 1. 1.25 spaces/one bedroom unit 2. 1.5 spaces/two bedroom unit As shown on the Builders Design plans, the proposal development will consist of the following types of dwelling units, and therefore will require the following number of parking spaces: 1. 36, one bedroom units X 1.25 spaces/one bedroom unit=45 parking spaces 2. 30,two bedroom units X 1.5 spaces/two bedroom unit= 45 parking spaces Total — 90 parking spaces According to 18.765.030(E), any multifamily dwelling unit project that has 10 or more required parking spaces must provide an additional 15% beyond the required parking spaces. Based on that fact, the proposed parking lot must provide an additional 14 spaces, for a grand total of 104 spaces. As shown on the Builders Design plans, the development will provide the following number of parking spaces: 1. 4 ADA parking spaces 2. 43 compact spaces • 3. 43 standard spaces Based on the above, the project proposes a total of 90 parking spaces, and 104 are required, therefore the applicant requests an Adjustment to reduce the number of parking spaces by 9%. Of the total 94 spaces, 43 spaces will be compact and 43 will be standard, which complies with the maximum ratio of 50% standard and 50%compact as required by 18.765.070. As documented on page 5 of the Lancaster Engineering report,Todd Mobley, PE, has provided evidence to demonstrate compliance with the parking adjustment criteria as set forth under 18.370.020(C)(6). To summarize his evidence he states the following as justification for the adjustment: A The ITE Parking Generation manual has a methodology to calculate that the proposed development will have a total demand of 75 parking spaces v. the 94 proposed. A The site is well-served by transit, which is itself a mitigating factor to permit less required parking. A Based on the Walk Score results, the site scores high, (80 = very walkable), which also is a mitigating factor to permit less required parking. A 18.370.020(C)(6) allows up to a 20% reduction, and the applicant is requesting an 9% reduction, which is less than of the allowed reduction. 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts, (MUE-1 Mixed Employment District) 18.520.020 List of Zoning Districts • 8 APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.520.020 (G), the MUE-1 zone allows residential uses that are compatible with the • employment character of the area. Typically, multifamily dwellings at a moderate to high dwelling density are located along transit streets, arterial streets near employment centers, (such as Washington Square and Lincoln Towers), that provide easy access to and from places of employment, or if employment is not local, then easy access to the regional freeway system, (such as Hwy 217), that will get employees to their places of employment. All of the above-mentioned factors are present at this location,therefore the proposed use of the subject site complies with this criterion. 18.520.030 Uses APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.520.1, (Use Table), multifamily units are a permitted use in the MUE-1 zone, therefore the proposed use of the subject site complies with this criterion. According to Table 18.520.2, (Commercial Zones), multifamily units must have a minimum height of two stories, a maximum height of 200', a maximum site coverage,(i.e. buildings and impervious surfaces), of 85%, a minimum landscape requirement of 15%, and a minimum residential density of 50 dwelling units/acre. The Greenburg Apartment will be three story dwelling units, whose buildings and parking lot occupy 84% of the site. With the remainder of the site in landscaping, (16%)According 18.715.020(A)(3)(b), the net developable acreage for multifamily development is calculated by deducting 15% of the gross acreage, which in this case is 1.57 acre. (1.57 X 15% =1.3 acres) Therefore the subject site's minimum density is 1.3 acres X 50 dwelling units/acre=66 units, which is the number of proposed dwelling units. Therefore, based on the above, the proposal complies with the Commercial Development standards and thus complies with this criterion. • 18.630 Washington Square Regional Center 18.630.010 Purpose and Applicability APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.630.010C, the following uses must comply with the Washington Square design Standards: All new developments, including remodeling and renovation projects are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Washington Square Regional Center. The proposed Greenburg Apartments will result in 66 unit apartment complex directly across the street from Washington Square, therefore the design standards of the Washington Square Regional Center do apply to this proposal. 18.630.030 Pre-Existing Uses and Developments within the Washington Square Regional Center Plan District Mixed Use Districts A. Applicability. Pre-existing housing units in mixed use districts are permitted Conversion of pre-existing housing units to other uses is subject to the requirements of this chapter. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 18.760.040, uses prohibited and structures that would be • 9 nonconforming in any of the regional center mixed use zoning districts that were lawfully in existence at the time of adoption of the regional center mixed use districts are considered to be • approved uses and structures. However,future additions, expansions, or enlargements to such uses or structures, shall be limited to the property area and use lawfully in existence at the time of adoption of this ordinance, February 22, 2002. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Currently, the subject site is vacant and consists of no structures. The only "use" that is pre-existing is a driveway apron and approach onto SW Greenburg that is apparently from some past use that no longer exists on the site. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the information presented above. 18.630.050 Site Design Standards A. Compliance. All development must meet the following site design standards. If a parcel is one acre or larger a phased development plan may be approved demonstrating how these standards for the overall parcel can be met. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.3 70.010.C.2,governing criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Building placement on major and minor arterials. a. Purpose. Architecture helps define the character and quality of a street and can make a strong statement about the overall community and city at large. The placement and design of buildings provides the framework for the streetscape and defines the edges of the public right-of-way.Architecture and ground floor uses can activate the street, either by its design presence or by those who come and go from it. At intersections, investing • in building frontages can create gateways and special places that add to the character of the area. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the elevation drawings within the Builders Design plans, the one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road have articulated bay front windows on all three stories that front the street. New interior sidewalks and attractive landscape will draw visitors into the protected ground floor entry. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented. b. Standard. Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of all street frontages along major and minor arterial streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on major and minor arterial streets. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Builders Design plans, the one-bedroom units and site landscaping along Greenburg Road occupy 50% of the frontage and the building is located at the public street intersection with Greenburg Road. The remaining 50% of the frontage is occupied with frontage landscaping and the only entrance into the subject site. 2. Building setback. a. Purpose. Buildings and investment in architecture is most conspicuous when it is visible from the street. The presence of buildings closely sited at the edge of the right-of-way creates an envelope for the street and a sense of permanence. S 10 APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the elevation drawings within the Builders Design plans, the one-bedroom units along • Greenburg Road have articulated bay front windows on all three stories that face out towards the street. New interior sidewalks and attractive landscape will draw visitors into the protected ground floor entry. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented. b. Standard. The minimum and maximum building setback from public street rights- of-way shall be in accordance with Table 18.520.2. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.520.2, the minimum front, side and rear setbacks are zero, subject to the specific qualifiers in footnotes # 20 and # 21. Footnote #20 states that the side and rear setbacks shall be 20' when,(as in this case), the MUE-I zone abuts residential districts as shown in Section 18.510.020. As shown on the enclosed zoning map, the adjacent zoning to the north and south is MUE-1, MUC to the west and Washington County zoning to the east. Section 18.510.020 lists a series of City of Tigard residential zoning districts,(e.g., R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R 4.5, etc.) that are not adjacent or near the subject site. Therefore the proposed 5' and 8' minimum side and rear setback are in compliance with this criterion. Footnote #21 states that the maximum front yard setback shall be 20'. Therefore the proposed 10' front yard setback is in compliance with this criterion. 3. Front yard setback design. a. Purpose. The front yard is the most conspicuous face of a building and requires special attention. Places for people and pedestrian movement helps create an active and safer • street. Higher level of landscape anticipates a more immediate visual result. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As required by the Landscaping and Screening Standards as set forth in 18.745, the 10' wide Greenburg Road front yard will be landscaped to a"Type A" landscape standard, which consists of 10' of lawn and living ground cover. The proposed landscaping will allow places for residents to interact with people passing by, easy pedestrian from the complex to the street, and allows views into the complex to allow an active and safer street. b. Standard For setbacks greater than 0 feet, landscaping,an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one street,the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to the applicable standard in paragraph 5 of this subsection A. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As stated above, the the Landscaping and Screening Standards as set forth in 18.745, the complex's front yard setback will 10' wide, and it will contain a 6' wide sidewalk between the street and the one- bedroom units along Greenburg Road. 4. Walkway connection to building entrances. a. Purpose. As density increases and employee and resident populations increase,it is • expected that more people will move between businesses within the WSRC. Provisions should 11 be made to encourage people to walk from business to business, and housing to business rather than use automobiles. • APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The Greenburg Apartments will contain a 6' wide sidewalk between the street and the one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road. In turn, that sidewalk will connect to a series of internal sidewalks that connect all units to each other. That internal sidewalk network, combined with the existing and proposed sidewalk network, will encourage people to walk from business to business, and housing to business rather than use automobiles. b. Standard. A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. This walkway must be at least six feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner adjacent to a public street. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the elevation drawings within the Builders Design plans, all units will have a 6' wide walkway that connects the buildings main entrance to the existing sidewalk on Greenburg Road. The walkway will be paved with scored concrete. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented. 5. Parking location and landscape design. a. Purpose. The emphasis on pedestrian access and a high quality streetscape experience requires that private parking lots that abut public streets should not be the predominant street feature. Where parking does abut public streets,high quality landscaping should • screen parking from adjacent pedestrian areas. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Builders Design plans, the proposed parking area will be screened from public view by the one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road, the landscape adjacent to those units, and additional frontage landscape opposite the driveway entrance. Based on the above, the proposed parking lot that abut Greenburg Road is not the predominant street feature in compliance with this criterion. b. Standard. Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. When buildings or phases are adjacent to more than one public street,primary street(s) shall be identified by the city where this requirement applies. In general, streets with higher functional classification will be identified as primary streets unless specific design or access factors favor another street If located the side, parking is limited to 50% of the primary street frontage. When abutting public streets, parking must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 parking lot screen standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is eight feet or is equal to the adjacent building setback, whichever is greater. All other site landscaping shall be landscaped to an L-2 general landscaping standard. The L-1 and L-2 standards are more fully described in Section 18.630.090. (Ord. 12-09§1) • 12 APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Builders Design plans, the proposed parking area is located behind the one-bedroom . units along Greenburg Road and to the side of all other units within the Greenburg Apartments, therefore the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.630.060 Building Design Standards A.All new buildings constructed in the MUC, MUE and MUR zones within the WSRC shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010.C.2, criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Ground floor windows. a. Purpose. Blank walls along the street frontage tend to be neglected, and are not pedestrian friendly. Windows help keep "eyes on the street" which promotes safety and security, and can help create a lively street frontage by displaying activities and products within the building. Lighting at night from ground floor windows also adds to the presence of activity and the sense that someone is home. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the elevation drawings within the Builders Design plans, all of the units within Greenburg Apartments have banks of windows on all of three floors that face the street, the parking lot, and common outdoor recreation areas. The only "blank wall" are those end walls of the southerly banks of apartments. The complex will include night lighting. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented. b. Standard. All street facing elevations within the building setback (0 to 10 feet) . along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows,display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as the entire requirement is located at a building corner. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the attached elevation drawings, the ground floor one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road have articulated bay front windows that occupy 51% of the ground floor wall area. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented. 2. Building facades. a. Purpose. Straight,continuous, unarticulated walls lack interest, character and personality. The standard provides minimum criteria for creating a diverse and interesting street scape. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the elevation drawings within the Builders Design plans, all of the building's front facades have a combination of articulated bay front windows, projecting gable ends, projecting balconies and inset entries that create interest, character and personality. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 13 b. Standard. Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: (1) a variation in building • materials; (2) a building off-set of at least one foot; (3) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (4) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the elevation drawings within the Builders Design plans, all of the building's front facades have a combination of articulated bay front windows, projecting gable ends, projecting balconies and inset entries that create interest, character and personality. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 3. Weather protection. a. Purpose. Weather protection is encouraged to create a better year-round pedestrian environment and to provide incentive for people to walk rather than drive. b. Standard. Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades,shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: • As shown on the elevation drawings within the Builders Design plans, all of the building's front entries are covered and protected from the weather. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 4. Building materials. a. Purpose. High quality construction and building materials suggest a level of permanence and stature appropriate to a regional center. b. Standard. Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than two feet. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the elevation drawings within the Builders Design plans, all of the building's exterior consist of high quality, window trim, gable end details and wider "belly band" trim to distinguish transitions between floors. None of the buildings will contain plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. S. Roofs and roof lines. a. Purpose. Roof line systems that blur the line between the roof and the walls of buildings should be avoided This standard simply states that roofing materials should • be used on the roof and that wall finish materials should be use on building walls. 14 The premise is that future buildings in the WSRC should have a look of permanence and quality. • b. Standard Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the elevation drawings within the Builders Design plans, all of the building's contain a true hipped roof with gable ends. Composition roof shingles will be used on all roof systems. The wall finish materials are incorporated into the gable ends. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 6. Roof-mounted equipment. a. Purpose. Roof top equipment, if not screened properly, can detract from views of adjacent properties.Also roofs and roof mounted equipment can be the predominant view where buildings are down slope from public streets. b. Standard.All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the elevation drawings within the Builders Design plans, there is no roof-mounted • equipment that will be the predominant view from the parking lot, adjacent neighbors or Greenburg Road. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the evidence presented above. 18.630.090 Landscaping and Screening Applicable levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other subsections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. A. L-1 parking lot screen. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on public streets. The L-1 standard is in addition to other standards in other chapters of this title. The setback shall be a minimum of eight feet between the parking lot and a public street. L-1 trees shall be considered parking lot trees and spaced between 30 and 40 feet on center within the setback. All L-1 trees shall be a minimum of 31/2-inch caliper at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a three-foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Ground cover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed landscape plan, the western end of the parking lot will be setback 25' from the Greenburg Road. The parking lot will contain the number of trees in compliance with this criterion. The interior parking lot landscape beds will contain shrubs and ground cover in compliance with this criterion. • 15 B. L-2 general landscaping. The L-2 standard applies to all other trees and shrubs required by this chapter and Chapter 18.745 (except those required for the L-1 parking lot screen). For • trees and shrubs required by Chapter 18.745, the L-2 standard is an additional standarrL All L-2 trees shall be 212-inch caliper at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. (Ord. 12-09§1) APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to the Pre-Application conference notes, based on a discussion with Planning staff, and a review of Chapter 18.745, the westerly front yard requires a Type "A" buffering and screening, and the easterly rear yard required a Type "C" buffering and screening. The Type "A" buffering and screening will consist of a 10' wide bed with lawn and living ground cover; the Type "C" buffering and screening will consist of an 8' wide bed with trees, shrubs and a 5' tall fence. (i.e. Option #2) The said trees, shrubs will be in compliance with this criterion. 18.705 Access/Egress/Circulation 18.705.030 General Provisions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The enclosed the Builders Design plans are scaled plans that shows the location of the proposed driveways, existing paved width of Greenburg Street, and all other proposed access improvements. Therefore the applicant is submitting an access plan in substantial compliance with 18.705.030 B. (See also attached Impact Study) F. Required walkway location. On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: • 2. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multi family developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The Greenburg Apartments will contain a 6' wide sidewalk between the street and the one-bedroom units along Greenburg Road. In turn, that sidewalk will connect to a series of internal sidewalks that connect all units to each other. That internal sidewalk network will also connect to the common open space areas. 3. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum six-inch vertical separation(curbed)or a minimum three-foot horizontal separation,except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping,pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes,benches,bicycle racks, and sign posts,and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; • APPLICANT'S COMMENT: 16 18.715.020 Density Calculation A. Definition of net development area. Net development area, in acres,shall be determined by • subtracting the following land area(s)from the gross acres, which is all of the land included in the legal description of the property to be developed APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The site does not contain any site-specific constraining factors as set forth under 18.715.020, and, according to the Development Engineering Pre-Application conference notes, the applicant will be required to dedicate public ROW such that Greenburg Road will be 49' side at center line. At this time, it is unclear how much land that will remove from net developable acreage. As set forth under 18.715.020.(A)(3), an applicant for multifamily development can allocate 15% of gross acreage for the purposes of a density calculation. Therefore, the net development area as defined by this criterion is: 1.57 Acres X 15%= 1.33 net developable acres B. Calculating maximum number of residential units. To calculate the maximum number of residential units per net acre, divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum number of square feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning district. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.520.2, (Commercial Zones), there is no maximum dwelling density: 66 dwelling units are proposed, therefore the proposal complies with this criterion. C. Calculating minimum number of residential units. As required by Section 18.510.040, the minimum number of residential units per net acre shall be calculated by multiplying the maximum number of units determined in Subsection B above by 80% (0.8). • APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.520.2, (Commercial Zones),the minimum dwelling density is 50 dwelling units/acre, and there is no maximum dwelling density.Therefore,the minimum dwelling density is: 1.33 acres X 50 dwelling units/acre= 66 dwelling units The applicants proposes 66 units, therefore the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.725.030 Performance Standards 18.725.030 (A) Noise APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Washington Square and the busily traveled Greenburg Road are directly adjacent to the site. Commercial development occupies the intersection of Greenburg and Greenburg and Lehman and Greenburg. Therefore,traffic noise, noise from commercial development and the glare from parking lot lights already impact the subject site. Based on its location, the subject site has nearby office/commercial uses and a regional shopping mall that already creates more noise than a typical apartment complex will generate. Existing single family and multifamily development are on adjacent lots. This multifamily residential development will approve and permit commonly anticipated residential activities that exist on nearby lots, such as landscape maintenance, occasional entertainment of guests, recreation activities outdoors • 18 and raising of domestic (i.e. cats, dogs, etc.) pets. Therefore, the proposed residences will be surrounded by and adjacent to other residences that do not generate any significant amounts of noise • beyond what is typically generated from residential activities. Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this 66-unit multifamily development within the MUE-1 zone will not generate significant amounts of noise beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.725.030(B) Visible Emissions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not create visible emission beyond what one might expect. (e.g. smoke from an outdoor barbeque, dust from a leaf blower, fumes from a lawnmower) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of visible emissions beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.725.030 C Vibrations APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not generate vibrations of the sort that this criterion aims to curtail. (e.g. heavy equipment operation, manufacturing uses) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of vibrations, because commonly accepted residential practices do not typically generate noticeable vibrations. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.725.030(D) Odors • APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not generate offensive odors beyond what one might expect. (e.g. applications of lawn fertilizers, pesticides, house painting, gasoline fumes from a lawnmower) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of odors beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.725.030 (E) Glare& Heat APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Based on the responses to 18.725.030 A, it is clear that residential uses will not generate glare and heat of the sort that this criterion aims to curtail. (e.g. highly reflective wall cladding, use of welding equipment, use of high-output outdoor security) Each individual unit may have outdoor lighting, but it will be the type of outdoor lighting typically found on most dwelling units. (e.g., 75W-100W bulb exterior fixtures) Based on the facts presented above, it is clear that approval of this development will not generate significant amounts of glare beyond what already exists within the current MUE zoned areas. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.725.030(F)Insects and Rodents • APPLICANT'S COMMENT: 19 The Greenburg Apartments will have a communal area set aside for closed lid garbage cans for garbage disposal and recycling, which inhibit insect and rodents from scattering garbage around the yard areas. • Most residents will not be allowed to create large piles of wood, debris, and grass clippings that would be attractive to insects and rodents. Therefore, based on the facts presented above, it is clear that most residents within this multifamily development will not create situations that are attractive to insects and rodents. (See also attached Impact Study) 18.745 Landscape& Screening Standards 18.745.020 Applicability A. Applicability. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development that requires a Type I conditional use minor modification, a Type I site development review minor modification, any Type II land use review or any Type III land use review unless otherwise specified in any of the sections below. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: This process is a Type II Site Development review, therefore, according to 18.745.020 and the Pre- Application conference notes, the relevant standards of 18.745 applies to this request. 18.745.040 Street Trees B. The minimum number of required street trees shall be determined by dividing the linear amount of street frontage within or adjacent to the site (in feet) by 40 feet. When the result is a fraction, the minimum number of required street trees shall be determined by rounding to the nearest whole number. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: iThe site has 100' of frontage along Greenburg Road. Based on the above, 2.5, or 3 street trees are required. As shown on the enclosed site plan, one street tree is shown south of the driveway entrance and four street trees are shown north of the dwellings fronting Greenburg Road. There really is no room to plant trees in the ROW as set forth under 18.745.040(E), but that criterion does allow a street tree to be planted within 6' of the ROW. The site plan shows that three trees will be planted in compliance with this criterion. 18.745.050 Buffering and Screening APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to the Buffering Matrix Table 18.745.1,(contained within the Landscaping and Screening requirements), and based on a discussion with Planning staff, the proposed multifamily dwelling development must provide a 10' wide Greenburg Road front yard buffer that will be landscaped to a "Type A" landscape standard, which consists of 10' of lawn and living ground cover. The easterly rear yard requires a Type "C" buffering and screening, which consists of an 6' tall block wall and a 6' wide bed with trees and shrubs. (i.e. Option#3) The said block wall, trees, and shrubs will be in compliance with this criterion. 18.745.050 (E) Screening:Special Provisions • 20 APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.745.050(E)(1)(a)(i-iv), parking and loading areas are required to be screened, and that • that screening should screen the parking area from public view. In addition, the parking area landscaping must achieve a 30% tree canopy cover at maturity. As demonstrated by the submitted landscape plan prepared by Western Design Group, (pages L1-L3), the parking lot is screened in substantial conformance with this criterion, and the planted frees will achieve a 30% tree canopy cover at maturity. According to 18.745.050(E)(2) and (4), refuse containers and storage areas must be screened by a wooden fence and landscaping to screen them from public view. As demonstrated by the submitted landscape plan prepared by Western Design Group, (pages L1-L3), the refuse containers and storage areas are screened by a wooden fence and landscaping to screen them from public view. 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste& Recyclable Storage 18.755.110 Purpose and Applicability B. Applicability. The mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage standards shall apply to new multi-unit residential buildings containing five or more units and nonresidential construction that are subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition,for such uses. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The proposal is for a 66 unit apartment complex that is defined as a new multi-unit residential building, therefore the relevant and applicable criteria of 18.755 apply. 18.755.030 Materials Accepted Except as provided for in 18.755.040.G and I,the storage area must be able to accept at least all "principle recyclable materials"designated by the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and other source-separated recyclable the local government identifies by regulation. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures will be able to accept all "principle recyclable materials" as defined by DEQ and other source-separated recyclable that Tigard identifies by regulation. Based on the above, the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.755.040 Methods of Demonstrating Compliance A. Alternative methods of compliance. An applicant shall choose one of the following four methods to demonstrate compliance: 1. Minimum standards; 2. Waste assessment; 3. Comprehensive recycling plan; or 4. Franchised hauler review and sign-off • 21 APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has chosen the Waste Assessment method, therefore the relevant and applicable criteria • as set forth under 18.755.040 (D)apply. D. Waste assessment method. 2. Typical application of method. This method is most appropriate when the specific use of a building is known and the type and volume of mixed solid waste to be generated can be estimated; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Evergreen Builders, LLC has had many years of experience building multifamily dwelling units in the Metro area, and they have real-time data on the estimated amount of solid waste/recycling that their tenants generated, how many trash enclosures are required for various sized apartment complexes and where those trash enclosures should be located. Evergreen Builders also has a trash/recyclers company that services all of their developments. Based on above, the Waste Assessment method is the best fit for this development. 3.(a)(b)(c)Application requirements and review procedures. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: Evergreen Builders, LLC understands that they must have a pre-conference with the solid waste coordinator, complete a solid waster assessment form and have the solid waster coordinator/plan check staff review and approved the waste assessment proposal. 18.755.050 Location,Design and Access Standards for Storage Areas • A. Applicable standards. The following location, design and access standards for storage areas are applicable to all four methods of compliance, described in Section 18.755.040. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has chosen the Waste Assessment method, therefore the relevant and applicable criteria as set forth under 18.755.050 apply. B. Location standards. 1. To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 10'trash enclosures will contain co-located areas for solid waste and recycling with in each trash enclosure. The proposal complies with this criterion based on the facts presented. 2. Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with uniform building and fire code requirements. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures will be reviewed for uniform building code and fire code standard as part of the building plan review process. Both enclosures will be designed in conformance with the above-cited standards, and if required, any possible changes/modification to those trash • 22 enclosure will be made prior to the issuance of a building permit. (See enclosed trash enclosure detail) The proposal complies with this criterion based on the facts presented. • 3. Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Site Plan, the two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development. Therefore the storage area requirement are satisfied by using multiple locations in compliance with this criterion. 4. Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Site Plan, the two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development. Therefore the trash enclosures are not located in the front yard setback and/or adjacent to a public or private street in compliance with this criterion. 5. Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Site Plan, the two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development. Therefore the trash enclosures are located in a central and/or visible location in compliance with this criterion. 6. Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in subsection C, design standards. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Site Plan, the two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures are located within the landscape beds within center parking island and in the landscape bed in the NE corner of the development. Therefore the trash enclosures are taking up required parking spaces. The said trash enclosures will be screened in accordance with the provisions in subsection C, design standards. 7. The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Site Plan, the two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development. Therefore the trash enclosures are located in areas that are easily accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. 23 C. Design standards. 1. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with • current methods of local collection. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures have dimensions consistent with other Tigard-area apartment dwelling complexes, where the standard enclosure size is 10' X 10'. (See attached site plans) 2. Storage containers shall meet uniform fire code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures will be made of concrete cinder block construction that will comply with uniform fire code standards. The enclosures will be covered with waterproof material in compliance with this criterion. 3. Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures will be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence. Gate openings will be provided that allow access to users and haulers. 4. Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. • APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures areas will contain labels that clearly state what type of materials are accepted within each container. D. Access standards. 1. Access to storage areas can be limited for security reasons; however, the storage area shall be accessible to users at convenient times of the day, and to collection service personnel on the day and approximate time they are scheduled to provide collection service. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: For security reasons, the two,proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures will be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence, and the gate openings will be locked. However, those gates will be unlocked during daytime and early evening hours and locked during late evening/early AM hours. They will also be unlocked on the scheduled garage/recycling collection days. 2. Storage areas shall be designed to be easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment,considering paving,grade and vehicle access. A minimum of 10 feet horizontal clearance and eight feet of vertical clearance is required if the storage area is covered APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Site Plan, the two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development. Therefore, the trash enclosures are located in • 24 areas that are easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment. Both of the trash enclosures will be covered. (See enclosed trash enclosure detail) • 3. Storage areas shall be accessible to collection vehicles without requiring backing out of a driveway onto a public street If only a single access point is available to the storage area, adequate turning radius shall be provided to allow collection vehicles to safety exit the site in a forward motion. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Site Plan, the two, proposed 10' X 10' trash enclosures are located in areas where collection vehicles will not be required to back out of a driveway onto a public street, because the proposed trash enclosures are located within the center parking island and in the NE corner of the development where vehicles can pull up the trash enclosure. 18.765 Off-street Parking& Loading Requirements 18.765.020 Applicability A. New construction. At the time of the erection of a new structure within any zoning district, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.765.020, developments that will result in the erection of new structures within any zoning district require off-street vehicle parking in accordance with Section 18.765.070. Approval of this request will result in the construction of 66 apartment dwelling units, therefore the relevant standards of 18.765 are applicable to this request. • 18.765.030 General Provisions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.765.030 (B), Off-street parking spaces for multifamily dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwellings. As shown on the Builders Design plans, the proposed parking lot is located on the same lot as the dwelling units in compliance with this criterion. As set forth under 18.765.030(E), Visitor parking in multifamily residential developments is required if the parking requirements result in more than 10 required parking spaces. In that instance, the applicant is required to provide an additional 15% of vehicle parking spaces beyond the minimum required for the use of guests of residents.As stated previously, the applicant has requested an Adjustment to these parking standards.The applicant can provide the required tenant parking but not all of the guest spaces. 18.765.040 General Design Standards APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.765.040 (B), the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation. On page 17 of this narrative, the applicant has provided evidence with regard to the access, egress and circulation standards as set forth in Chapter 18.705 and thus the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards As set forth under Table 18.765.2, bicycle spaces for Multifamily units are calculated at a rate of one space for every two dwelling units. Therefore, as applied to this case, 33 bicycle parking spaces are • 25 required for the 66 unit complex, and 35 are provided, which exceeds the minimum bicycle parking requirement. • A. Location and access. With regard to the location and access to bicycle parking: 1. Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed site plan, all bicycle parking areas are provided within 50 feet of primary entrances to all multifamily dwelling structures in compliance with this criterion. (See also attached Impact Study) 2. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed site plan, all bicycle parking areas are not within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways in compliance with this criterion. (See also attached Impact Study) 3. Outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Builders Design plans, all bicycle parking areas are visible from on-site buildings and/or the street in compliance with this criterion. (See also attached Impact Study) • B. Covered parking spaces. 1. When possible, bicycle parking facilities should be provided under cover. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed site plan, the subject is odd-shaped and thus it is a difficult site within which to provide all of the code-required number of dwelling units, open space, parking spaces, landscaping, screening and buffering. Given the underlying site's tight physical constraints, there was no practicable way to provide the required number of bicycle under cover. The operative phrase in this code criterion is "when possible", and as demonstrated above, it is physically not possible to provide cover bicycle spaces on the subject site. 2. Required bicycle parking for uses served by a parking structure must provide for covered bicycle parking unless the structure will be more than 100 feet from the primary entrance to the building, in which case, the uncovered bicycle parking may be provided closer to the building entrance. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The proposal does include a parking structure,therefore this criterion does not apply to this request. C. Design requirements. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: • 26 1. The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for 11111 long-term (employee)parking is encouraged but not required; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant is proposing bike racks that can be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. This is a residential development and not a commercial development, therefore the provision of long term employee bike lockers is not required. 2. Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant is proposing bike racks that can be securely anchored to the ground as shown on the enclosed site plan. 3. Bicycle parking spaces shall be at least two and one-half feet by six feet long, and, when covered,with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed site plan, the applicant is proposing bicycle parking spaces that are at least two and one-half feet by six feet long. Each bicycle rack is a stand-alone, individual unit and not situated in rows, therefore there is no need to provide an aisle between rows of bicycling parking. 4. Each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; • APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed site plan, the applicant is proposing bicycle parking spaces that face outwards and towards the sidewalk, and each space is stacked next to each other, therefore each bicycle space is accessible without moving another bicycle. S. Required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The proposed bicycle spaces are for the use of tenants and guests and the applicant will not rent and/or lease those spaces to anyone. 6. Areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed site plan, the areas set aside for bicycle parking spaces are adjacent to or at the end of sidewalks and are not reserved for any other use other than bicycle parking. D. Paving. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e.,pavers, asphalt, concrete, other pervious paving surfaces, or similar material. This surface must be designed and maintained to remain well-drained. • 27 APPLICANT'S COMMENT: • As shown on the enclosed site plan, the bicycle parking space areas are adjacent to or at the end of sidewalks, therefore they are situated on a hard surfaced material in compliance with this criterion. 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to Table 18.765.2., multifamily dwelling units required the following parking space ratios based on the number of proposed bedrooms/unit: 1. 1.25 spaces/one bedroom unit 2. 1.5 spaces/two bedroom unit As shown on the Builders Design plans, the proposal development will consist of the following types of dwelling units, and therefore will require the following number of parking spaces: 3. 36, one bedroom units X 1.25 spaces/one bedroom unit= 45 parking spaces 4. 30, two bedroom units X 1.5 spaces/two bedroom unit= 45 parking spaces Total = 90 parking spaces According to 18.765.030(E), any multifamily dwelling unit project that has 10 or more required parking spaces must provide an additional 15% beyond the required parking spaces. Based on that fact, the proposed parking lot must provide an additional 14 spaces, for a grand total of 104 spaces. As shown on the Builders Design plans, the development will provide the following number of parking spaces: • 4. 4 ADA parking spaces 5. 43 compact spaces 6. 43 standard spaces Based on the above, the project proposes a total of 90 parking spaces, and 104 are required, therefore the applicant requests an Adjustment to reduce the number of parking spaces by 9%. Responses to the applicable and relevant Adjustment criteria have already been provided under 18.370.020 on pages 7-8 of this application narrative. 18.780 Signs APPLICANT'S COMMENT: The applicant has no specific plans for a free-standing sign within the front yard area along Greenburg Road. However,the applicant is aware that all applicable and relevant criteria of Chapter 18.780 when more definite plans are made for signage. 18.790 Urban Forestry Plan 18.790.020 Applicability APPLICANT'S COMMENT: • 28 According to I8.790.020(A)(6), the applicable and relevant Urban Forestry criteria apply to a Type II Site Development Review. • 18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement A. Urban forestry plan requirements.An urban forestry plan shall: 1. Be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect (the project landscape architect) or a person that is both a certified arborist and tree risk assessor (the project arborist), except for minor land partitions that can demonstrate compliance with effective tree canopy cover and soil volume requirements by planting street trees in open soil volumes only; APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the enclosed air photo map, the site does not contain any trees that will be required to be preserved or protected. As shown on the Builders Design plans, the applicant proposed to plant trees in the landscape and in the parking lot that will comply with the applicable standard percent effective tree canopy cover as set forth in Section 10, part 3, item N of the Urban Forestry Manual. (i.e. 33% effective tree canopy) Those trees will be planted by a licensed landscaper who has a certified arborist on staff. Therefore, the applicant asserts that the proposed tree planting does not need to be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect, but in fact can be accomplished by the firm hired to plant all site landscaping. 3. Meet the tree canopy site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual; and APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As shown on the Western Design Group's plans, the applicant proposed to plant trees in the landscape . and in the parking lot that will comply with the applicable standard percent effective tree canopy cover as set forth in Section 10, part 3, item N of the Urban Forestry Manual. (i.e. 33% effective tree canopy) Based on the above,the proposal complies with this criterion. 18.795 Vision Clearance APPLICANT'S COMMENT: As documented in the enclosed Lancaster Engineering report, Todd Mobley, PE, the applicant's transportation engineer, has documented site distance at the proposed driveway intersecting point with Greenburg Road. Greenburg Road has a posted speed of 35mph, therefore there must be 350' of sight distance to the north and south. As shown in all exhibits and attachments contained in this application submittal, there are no apparent and/or existing obstructions that will block the view of traffic entering and exiting the subject site. Therefore, based on the above-stated facts, the proposal complies with 18.795. 18.810 Street& Utility Improvement Standards 18.810.020 General Provisions APPLICANT'S COMMENT: According to 18.810.020, no development may occur and no land use application may be approved unless the public facilities related to development comply with the public facility requirements established in this section and adequate public facilities are available. Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements only when the required exaction is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development.As applied to this case, the City's • 29 Engineering Section has specified the frontage improvements required for this development. (See attached Pre-Application Conference notes) The proposal may require street improvements to • Greenburg St., such as 34' of�h width pavement to the street, center line, curbing, a 10' wide sidewalk, street trees and street signs. The applicant will prepare development plans, prepared by a PE to show those improvements, if required. The applicant is also aware that there may be easements required to connect on-site storm water and sanitary lines to the above-mentioned storm water and sewer lines east and adjacent to the subject site. The applicant will show the said storm line and sewer line easements on the final version of the development plans. Therefore, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with this criterion based on the proposed development plans in the Builders Design plans. (See also attached Impact Study) IV. SUMMARY: Evidence presented in the application narrative, exhibits and attachments demonstrates that Adjustments to the second access requirement of 18.705 and the parking requirements of 18.765 are justified, given the site specific constraints that warrant these minor variations from the strict interpretation of these code requirements. All other aspects of the proposal meet the applicable zoning code standards, or can be met by the imposition of conditions of approval. V. CONCLUSION: This application has been submitted in accordance with the City of Tigard Municipal Code for a Type II Site Development Review with Adjustments to create the 66-unit Greenburg Apartments in the MUE-1 zone. Evidence has been presented to address all applicable sections of the Tigard Municipal Code and relevant policies and • implementing strategies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, based on all the evidence presented in this application narrative, exhibits and attachments, this • 30 • II 1Y .jJf a! f� .:' `� 11 \ • • .a "• ,1 <�7.Ir Jrr•l lr \ :Jt { <• I f y tt-- .-1 �� 1 .' is 1 26 .t;,1 .11 x_,,, I. .r li !1: \ \7 •s i . r 5 P s iML s : -`.��alr 3 w-'°{ '- vl iI, r •h 1 .• . , {S 1 1 v'1 -•> :,, ' t+; r�, e...* • " '3 E1-r e E 1;� �,.1L.�L�� 4• r 1 i .!.tl .: `a� ds .C. `.,-;r. "ar:•.=. r rt-i '`^`�' r a�• it t 'a{r f ,A � ^! -WI). II 4 rj(`#,`Ja 1r 1 J /t f f <r•a_Ir`J.-C 1._ d ?a" t r ,y, i ,y•' •� • r• F; it �iF� rr ' T'y "t r<14. •t'..1. 777. '. - 5 f{ ± i .4 ty..K, • 'q5H a t ..•p••• 'A' y1J, ��4,A • I (.' r•�, `IF n `•-"A.t 11 ... i r,1�'yy l:.2-- a4.` 2 r ;,.,Fa"I'",. 94 f 1 a ,. ill 1 a 'i-, i•A ' <..2,,,--trr , �^ ti, yy 4y r �• J .••'Ti; , 1'. t , •� r T+'w S� .' 1 tr } � 2 � • i i`k.X�� •1 ` •'.. }• t._•"' f7•Sr1♦ -e is• f•Ss•-t.:.. 4 ,j•.•• r ar 1_tnr� 5. ...... 1 Y N \\ M1l .y �.•0+'G"'�9�iir.T.� iyy {t'S`.;•. L 7x (fit-;+5 �� 5 , s n( :,- .k e r 1 °'�f.,.-„ W _1<, .,ems d , .' a k ••Y '.qs }F a s j •I J h e�r11,,jj�} y. �� ♦ •.1'u' �-iy4•a st,..' l},,.i • 7 ,'i + . _ I ),'7 1 4 s'"t••. A .'`tea` tyf aS it*♦ + sad. .1_ I ,t• �. ; , 1 t< I �,-;-{v v44:l Cyt'•.•Y4 St> }'.'•� v 4 1-- f .a a l ... , , -'.,1 fd F{ '1h ... ` - _.I11, t \a Z ^ `' 1`.4 • �'1- ,1 1• 1.. i _ \(� y }°fit jSk� hx a4.�.t ..ary;�• �• • i .. t. .y „- Wr 'R+'T—, e'•?di r'l f t itrtiii .. .1 �. _ g f ( --rA.1,? 1 , , moo<r!� LY Alt� � T t� f ;}{1 .=.. '3.� F I1 A T , •. —' y� f. • 1.L ittb4 t , . Y J 11 • t� , • A i • • l< li.. 3 zsf 3JJ 1 r A J r s r{. �i l 1 - -3 ' 4. �at*, 1 ,5aCAc a ra � � 1 < I 1 I :4.70 ..,-•• • _ ATTACHMENT A - Air Photo Site Map • CITY OF TIGARD • PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) Pia . ...._ PRE-APP _.MTG.DATE: 10-1 1 STAFF AT PRE,APP.: \��J RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: toe Westerman Phone: 50�-4621 AGENT: Phone PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: 95500 W C'reenburQ Road TAX MAPS)/LOT#(S): 1 S12 DC00900 NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: Sit Develo ment Review r n d"ustment • s PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 5 three sto multi- a; " .buildin s 6 -70 units 20 a s ace• 60 arkin s aces" • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: MUE-1 ZONING MAP DESIGNATION:MUE-1 ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.3.1Q) MINIMUM LOT SIZE:NONE sq.ft.Average Min.lot width: NONE ft. Max. bldg height: 200 ft. (2 stories min.) MAX.SITE COVERAGE:.U% (all bldgs..&imperv.surfaces) Min.landscaped or natural vegetation area: 15%. Setbacks: Front: 0 ft(Max 20 ft) Side: ** ** _t Rear: 0 ft Corner: Oft ax.: t . from street. Garages:20 ft Min. Res. Density: 5 Ounits/acre ** Side&rear yard setbacks shall be 20'when zone abuts residential districts. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED PARTIES, ITT O TI ARTI AT ATcrnrn.T� two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required.�Pleof eir aseoreview the land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held p "or to submittin our a lication or the a lication will not be acc ted. • * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. a Plans CITY I TtG•�RD Pre-Application Conference Notes 7 r• / ,/ / 7 + /Residential App asim/Planning Dnision Section d/I ��H�'/1�!`� I F /�( S^ Page 1 oF8 • ® NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Chapter 18.390) The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A,NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable . approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. ® IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050) As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE AN IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address,at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development. Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. ® ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.765) Minimum number of accesses:2 Minimum access width: 30 feet. Minimum pavement width: 24 feet& 5 foot walkway required. ®WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code.Chapter 18.705) Within all ATTACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling SHALL BE CONNECTED BY WALKWAY TO THE VEHICULAR PARKING AREA,COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES. El RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION (Refer to Code Chapter 18.715)—See example below. • The NET RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOWED on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the net area of the developable land by the minimum number of square feet required per dwelling unit as specified by the applicable zoning designation. Net development area is calculated by subtracting the following land area(s) from the total site area: All sensitive lands areas including: ➢ Land within the 100-year floodplain; > Slopes exceeding 25%; ➢ Drainageways; and > Wetlands for the R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 zoning districts. Public right-of-way dedication: > Single-family allocate 20%of gross acres for public facilities;or ➢ Multi-family allocate 15%of gross acres for public facilities;or ➢ If available,the actual public facility square footage can be used for deduction. All land proposed for private Streets SEE NOTES FOR ESTIMATED DENSITY CALCULATIONS. EXAMPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS: EXAMPLE: USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE (3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE) WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS Single-Family Multi-Family 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 8.712 sq. ft. (20%) for public right-of-way 6.534 sq. ft. (15%) for public right-of-way NET: 34,848 square feet NET: 37,026 square feet • _ 3 050 minimum lot area) - 3 050 (minimum lot area) 1 11.4 Units Per Acre (maximum) = 12.1 Units Per Acre (maximum) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 • The Development Code requires that the net site area exist for the next whole dwelling unit. NO ROUNDING UP IS PERMI T1 I,D. • Minimum Project Density is 80% of the maximum allowed density. TO DETERMINE, MULTIPLY THE MAXIMUM BY.8. • SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.730) • STREETS: feet from the centerline of S- FLAG LOT: A TEN (10)-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK applies to all primary structures. ➢ ZERO LOT LINE LOTS: A minimum of a ten (10)-foot separation shall be maintained between each dwelling unit or garage. • MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL building separation standards apply within multiple-family residential developments. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES UP TO 528 SQUARE FEET in size may be permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in size. Five(5)-foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UP TO 1,000 SQUARE FEET on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size. (See applicable zoning district for the primary structures' setback requirements.] ❑ FLAG LOT BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 11/2 STORIES or 25 feet,whichever is less in most zones;21/2 stories,or 35 feet in R-7, R-12,R-25 or R-40 zones provided that the standards of Section 18.730.010.C.2 ate satisfied. Ej BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.745) In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR.ELIMINATE ADVERSE.NOISE OR VISIJAL IMPACIb between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the CITY REQUIRES LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREAS along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are • described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development.Code. The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFERS applicable to your proposal area is: Buffer Level TYPE C 1 4`along north boundary. Buffer Level TYPE C along east boundary. Buffer Level TYPE C 1.4 along south boundary. Buffer Level TYPE A along west boundary. SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: NORTH.SOUTH&EAST. E. STREET TREES & PARKING LOT TREES (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745 and 18.765) STREET TREES SHALL BE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE (TYPE III), DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW (TYPE II & III), MINOR LAND PARTITION (TYPE II), PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (TYPE III), SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (TYPE II), AND SUBDIVISION (TYPE II & III). The minimum number of required street trees shall be determined bydividing the linear amount of street frontage within or adjacent to the site (in feet) by 40 feet (if the number is a fraction,round to the nearest whole number). The trees shall be placed within the public right-of-way whenever possible. but no more than six (6) feet from the right-of-way boundary. Street trees shall be planted according to Section 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual and adequate soil volumes shall be provided in accordance with Section 12 of the Urban Forestry Manual. Existing trees may be used to meet the street standards. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. PARKING LOT TREES ARE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE (TYPE III), DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW (TYPE II & III), PLANNED • DEVELOPMENT(TYPE III),AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(TYPE II).All parking areas,including parking spaces and aisles, shall be required to achieve at least 30% tree canopy cover at maturity directly above the CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8 Residential Appligpon/Planning Division$upon parking area in accordance with Section 13 of the Urban Forestry Manual. . ® RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Pride Disposal can be reached at(503) 625-6177. ® PARKING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.765 & 18.705) ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED. ➢ Single-family Requires: One (I) off-street parking space per dwelling unit;and One (1) space per unit less than 500 square feet. Multiple-family Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom; 1.5 spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms;and 1.75 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms. 32 1-bed. Units: 40 spaces 28 2 bed. Units: 42 spaces TOTAL: 82 spaces + 13 (guest parking) = 95 spaces Multi-family dwelling units with more than ten (10) required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall consist of 15% of the total required parking. NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. Parking stalls shall be dimensioned as follows: > Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet. 6 inches X 18 feet,6 inches. • ➢ Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet. 6 inches X 16 feet,6 inches. > Handicapped parking: All parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabled person parking spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. ® BICYCLE RACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.765) BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. 1.0 space/2 units = 30 spaces required for 60 units ❑ SENSITIVE LANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.775) The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas. and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated-on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. SOME RESIDENTIAL RELATED DEVELOPMENT IS EXEMPT. 410 STEEP SLOPES (Refer to Code Section 18.775.070.C) When STEEP SLOPES exist,prior to issuance of a final order,a geotechnical report must be submitted which CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for • achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. ® CLEANWATER SERVICES (CWS),Service Provider Letter PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the CWS R&O 07-20 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. ® SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively,a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. ® URBAN FORESTRY PLAN (Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.0 and the "Tree Canopy Requirements" Brochure) AN URBAN FORESTRY PLAN IS REQUIRED FOR THE FOLLWING TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT: Conditional Use (Type III);Downtown Design Review(Type II and III);Minor Land Partition (Type II);, Planned Development (Type III);Sensitive Lands Review (Type II and III);Site Development Review(Type II); and Subdivision (Type II and III). The plan needs to be prepared by an ISA certified arborist or landscaped architect. Percentage of mature canopy cover required: 33 % (Refer to Appendix 2-6 in Urban Forestry Manual for a list of trees with mature canopy cover areas) • Percentage of mature canopy cover required per lot in the R-1,R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5 e'r R-7 zones: 15% An urban forestry plan shall: - Be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect (the project landscape architect) or a person possessing dual certifications as a certified arborist and certified tree risk assessor(the project arborist); - Meet the tree preservation and removal site plan standards in Section 10, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual; - Meet the tree canopy site plan standards in Section 10,part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual;and - Meet the supplemental report standards in Section 10,part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. TREE CANOPY FEE. If the effective percentage of tree canopy cover cannot be met, the applicant shall provide the city a tree canopy fee according to the methodology outlined in Section 10, part 4 of the Urban Forestry Manual. 18.790.040-Discretionary Urban Forestry Plan Review Option In lieu of providing payment of a tree canopy fee when less than the standard effective tree canopy cover required by Section 10, part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual will be provided, an applicant may apply for a discretionary urban forestry plan review. The discretionary urban forestry plan review cannot be used to modify an already approved urban forestry plan, any tree preservation or tree planting requirements established as part of another land use review approval, or any tree preservation or tree planting requirements required by another chapter in this title. ® PRESERVATION OF EXISTING TREES (Refer to Code Section 18.790.050.C.) To assist in the preservation and/or planting of trees and significant tree groves, the director may apply one or more of the following flexible standards as part of the land use review approval. Use of the flexible standards • shall be requested by the project arborist or landscape architect as part of the land use review process. The flexible standards are only applicable to trees that are eligible for credit towards the effective tree canopy cover of the site. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 Residential Application/Planning Uisision Section Appropriate species of trees in good condition and suitable for preservation receive a 200 percent credit based on their existing canopy area. Refer to Section 11-Part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual for submittal requirements. •® CLEAR VISION AREA (Refer to Code Chapter 18.795) The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. The applicant shall show the clear vision areas on the site plan, and identify any obstructions in these areas. I I FUTURE STREET PLAN AND EXTENSION OF STREETS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.030.F.) A FUTURE STREET PLAN shall: Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 530 feet surrounding and adjacent to the proposed land division. Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 530 feet of the site. Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed. ❑ ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.060) MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. • The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS.SHALL NOT EXCEED 21/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1'/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. ❑ BLOCKS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.040) The perimeter of BLOCKS FORMED.BY STREETS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2,000 FEET measured along the right-of-way center line except where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or,pre-existing development. When block lengths greater than 330 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. CODE CHAPTERS ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design ❑ 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) Standards) ❑ 18.340(Director's Interpretation) ® 18.630(Washington Square Regional ® 18.765 (Off-Street Parking/Loading Center) Requirements) ❑ 18.350(Planned Development) ❑ 18.640(Durham Quarry Design ❑ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) ® Standards) 18.360(Site Development Review) ® 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) ® 18.780(Signs) ® 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) ❑ 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) ❑ 18.380(Zoning Map/Text ® 18.715(Density Computations) El 18.790(Urban Forestry Plan) ) ❑ 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) ❑ 18.720(Design Compatibility ® 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) Standards) ® 18.390(Decision Making ® 18.725(Environmental Performance Procedures/Impact Stud ❑ 18.798 (Wireless Communication P Y) Standards) Facilities) 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) tEl 18.730(Exceptions To Development P ® 18.810 (Street & Utility Improvement ❑ Standards) Standards) 18.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 • Q 18.430(Subdivisions) ❑ 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) 0. 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) ® 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) ink Eg 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) ❑ 19.750 (Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) ❑ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) Eg 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: Provide a narrative that states facts to show how the criteria are met. Referring to the plan does not meet the criterion. Narratives that do not provide facts are considered incomplete and will prolong the review process. The site is located within the Washington Square Regional Center; therefore the development must meet the Washington Square design standards. The front yard for most western units must be along Greenburg Road. These units must be oriented to Greenburg Road, have connections to Greenburg Road. and meet windows/articulation/variable building materials/landscaping requirements. Estimated Density Calculations: Gross Square Footage 66,646 Access &ROW (15%) 9,996 Net Developable Area 56,650 65 units minimum The Washington Square chapter allows an adjustment to reduce the minimum by 25%. Please review the purpose statement of the Washington Square Regional Center when addressing the adjustment criteria. OPROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. ❑ Public hearing before the Planning Commission. ❑ Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail ordropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. The Planning counter closes at 5:00 PM. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8%" x 11". One. 8%" x 11" map of a proposed project shall also be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Applications with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of thew application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications .involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard Hearing s Officer . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. • Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8 Reskkntial Application/Planning Division Section This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION (County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-8884) PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISIO LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicants axe. required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). PLEASE NOTE: "Die conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to_ site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: Agnes Kowacz CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503-718-2427 FAX: 503-598-1960 EMAIL: agnesk@tigard-or.gov III CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page B of 8 Residental Annlitatnm/PI nnn.nis'..rm Sertinn From: O'Connell, Grant [mailto:oconnelg ,trimet.org] Sent: Friday,March 14,2014 8:47 AM To: 'daryl@jmwproperties.com' Cc; Baldwin, Ben Subject: RE: Greenburg Rd.Apartments Daryl, My name is Grant O'Connell, I work in Ben Baldwin's group here at TriMet. I apologize for the delayed response.Thank you for contacting us regarding a shelter at your development. We appreciate your support of transit. I regret to inform you we would not be interested in adding a stop at this location. Many factors must be considered and here's what I see.at this location. Typically stops are placed in pairs as riders need service both arriving and departing. With that in mind we like stops to be located near legal street crossings. This address is mid-block and placing a pair of stops may encourage unsafe behavior. Also in the northbound direction this address is just prior to a turn into Washington Square Mall. Having a bus pull to the curb and shortly thereafter need to merge back across 2 lanes into a turn lane is not ideal. • - Finally we generally seek to strike a balance between strategic stop placement for riders and limiting the number of stops to provide efficient service. At this location there are already stops nearby. Perhaps there are steps you can take when planning your development to be sure that the nearby stops seem readily accessible through pedestrian pathways? Again, we greatly appreciate your interest making your development transit friendly. I'm happy to discuss this further if you feel I may have missed something in my assessment. My contact information is below. Regards, Grant O'Connell • ATTACHMENT D - Tri-Met response to proposed transit improvements pry. • • SCHOTT&ASSOCIATES Ecologists & Wetlands Specialists 2101$NE Hwy 99E • P.O.Box 589 • Aurora,OR 97002 • (503)670-6007 • FAX:(503)670-6011 March 12, 2014 Joe Westerman Evergreen Builders LLC Re: 9560 SW Greenberg Road- Wetlands and Sensitive Areas Dear Joe: I conducted a site visit last Friday to the property located at 9560 SW Greenburg Road, Tigard, Oregon. I walked the entire site, and looked for wetlands and other Sensitive Areas. It is my understanding that Clean Water Services(CWS)identified a potential Sensitive area on or near the site. Aerial photographs and the Washington County Soil Survey were reviewed prior to visiting the site. There were no indicators of wetlands observed on the aerial photo graphs. the soil survey mapped Huberly soils on the site,and Huberly soils are listed as be being hydric.CWS probably • saw the mapped hydric soils, which was probably the reason why they identified the potential for Sensitive Areas being on the site. The site consists of an open field,which is kept mowed,probably to reduce fire danger. The site is dominated by grasses. The soils were examined in a couple of places, and no hydric indicators were observed. In fact, the soils appear to have been missed mapped, and are probably the Aloha series. The soils I examined had an epipedon with a color of 10YR 3/3. Which is too bright to be a Huberly soil. However, the most important observation was the lack of wetland hydrology. The current water year has proven to be very dry. However,we are ahead for the calendar year. February we received nearly 200% of the normal rainfall, and most of the rain fell in the second half of the month. We are about an inch of water above the average for the month of March. It rained 0.44 on the day before the site visit. However,the only place I observed saturated soils was south of the site. However, this area did not have hydric soils. So, it is not a wetland. There are no wetlands,or other waters on or adjacent to the site. The soil survey apparently has a missed map soil being on the site, which is why CWS probably identified possible wetlands on or adjacent to the site. Sincerely, Martin R. Schott,Ph.D.,PWS • ATTACHMENT E - Martin Schott Wetland and Sensitive Area Response )) , 9550 SW GREENBURG RD ) . 0 ., ' -;ITIV-1.;:,-", iti -•,. " Description tti Size 0 square feet - -, '-----:- ' .,..z,.. . . ......... _ Number of Bedrooms - - - , 217 ,-- ,..• • Bathrooms \ -.....(o . Property Map A , ..i&o, ,,,e4--• -,_ ,... --, 957 L `-... '‘... r-1„fx•.'a:"1".. v, % \ 1 AO!(1 1' \ \ •-, ' \\ ''''' 9511\ 2-335 4(P. • .'.17. f:',:ihr; PAP.T.... ..c. .1'4 2 1,... 0.0,4"ff ,0;• ,.. . 'IN' Property Value (2013) • Market Value $1,573,980.00 i Assessed Value $0.00 ______; ---1 Taxes () t 1 - --- -------------------------- Property Taxes $0.00 1 Total Taxes $0.00 Misc Info Year Built 0 i Foundation Type , Interior Finish ] Roof Style Roof Cover Type • _ _ Flooring T _ _ __ --1ype • • 0 _ f firm:Irit L-'rinn. 11 , Eli AtZA �J Llrgt to Saalei•r t Sale t.— v• Washington County,Oregon(ORO6?) - - t' ' w ,u Map Unit Map Unit Name Acres Percent :C v Symbol In AOI of AOI 1 Aloha silt loam 0.3 6.4% '' 22 Hubeny slit loam 2.2 55.3% v •1 , , 458 Woodburn sift loam,3 to 1.5 38 3% `�• ' s,0 . 7 percent slopes - ..f ' r Totals for Area of Interest 4.0 100.0% - r • h-, r?+. . � !1, s e r .;,.t;y ,, 4 1 Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. You have zoorned in beyond the scale at whkh the soil nep for this area is Intended to be used. M I done at a particular scale.The soli surveys that comprise your AOi were Trapped at 1.20,000.The i and the level of detail shown In the resulting sdll nap are dependent on that nap scale. .Enlargement of rtmps beyond the scale of napping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of map of soli One placement.The naps do not show the smell areas of contrasting salts that could have lo, more detailed scale. r FOIA I AccessibilIty Statement I Privacy Polley I Non-Discrimination Statement I tnforrretlon quality I USA.gov 1 White House EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Neighborhood Meeting • • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 4',V•It...,.,..^',A,,"4.f,,,Z*....,4.'kr.1,:..zrl,„,'7,--., - ,,,% - ' --'',"..• ''''''‘V.. gratla...-Fif..0.•..7.-.:Mr.11.M.eni!`!"- -64.17,9141-TY''. ;z:f,f,,--,, ,, ,f,,-,, ..1 S' -- " •. ' ...t -- -.,. •• .. - tc . f:1-.%---r. : ' . - I - '.-,'-:',•-• ::---A"---?!. ., 4-1,•••, . ;,, .1 -- '-,:* , - . ...T•.-.::?, •1 •••=_.., - ' .......,, -...7,e_z-: ' f— . ' -.. .-_ „•,_-, .-,, 1\ rs -,,:, i: r: ri ri.: ci il l;-..1 p ,. L',.--,;",-.-;• - ., i:- .,,.:'-'-? 4.-: . ,.1-p,:%-z1.7147... .. ,:4., . ... . -. .,-..4, 7r-:-- --,:- '''';Nt-T-`::_:',-.. f:k..-1-4,•:'-`_;-:':7- ;°•;.si;ir.`V:14174 ':-:°::-tj:li.•''..T.. - ..,:l.:Te f:' - ' -,;`:..5:-e:c.:'•-f.:*::::.3.--Zi'..„-„'''';:l.5-41-t,L4zt'2„-:.--.1 ...,..-.7.,-t.,-4--:=1- ..:c,-.•-;:,.--.,:z.;•.,A:5,,Att4ZI-VA-44-11;raf4,4•:...ittittipiffe..'-': ‘-..--•-:"-:-•,.'g -1, • - - - - --•-• 0::-,:',c.,---s----f---:',----L-L-5,--v-e-..:4-4:---4;3:;-z,.,.,z...2.,-...1-,,,. --.2,T,--::.--...-4 ,---s-.,.-it,--;?)„,.....4.1.4.4r,„zef.f.A.-0..ie.„;.... - ...,: ..--.s• ,,.... . ,,---A , ,,-,:.--,-4.7,--4-At,Vage,:---Viill-ittVAt.%V.Q;;:'i.:_igiilf.7:tii:X,i4tayt*Mfgq--:-.43Pr.g-S-L4-:,2,...-;_:t.:,...:-.__--,:::::- .- •:-.- Date: Monday, March 10h, 2014 :4"%-•-.-,-,:.=,„ ' i'..,-,-,.. --r•:.pze. Time: 6:30 pm 4.61--.2*^!'„-:•'-0:k Location: Metzger Elementary School Library -;.;,,,If:',4,.,:,•1;:...i.rs1 tifl;:e-'...$7.?'.4 MEETING AGENDA: - ‘ - -- 1. Introduction a. Reading of City required Statement of Purpose for Neighborhood Meetings(attached) b. Why is a neighborhood meeting required - 2. Project Team Introductions a. Bruce Vincent BedsauVVincent Consulting, LLC, planning consultant 7,:-."•,---_.•...I:. - - b. Joe Westerman, Evergreen Builders, owner :`71';'-,•- -r-,-1'' c. Daryl Retzlaff, Evergreen Builders, project manager ;;:,,'•-• ,`.--:,''s A d. Clay Harrington, Evergreen Builders, superintendent .11.4;, •?:.,-,04,i ilfittlet.V , 3. Overview of Project Components Ve&V-P-stvz- a. Project name, Greenburg Road Apartments(site plan attached) 1.114-44',42: b. Project address, 9550 SW Greenburg Road VI r',''574.44 c. Time line for application submittal kt'.:1-',:;-`1-7'-f• d. Design Criteria within Washington Square Regional Center Plan District ri•-. I„,-v tv' *--e..f.'"•:72:=4-fz.:v.. e. Proposed building and unit types 44:1124/V, t . 1 bedroom, 704 sq. feet(building elevation and floor plan attached) • 2 bedroom, 985 sq.feet(building elevation and floor plan attached) • 2 bedroom over garage, 1007 sq. feet(building elevation and floor plan attached) 4.1.•-e-:fei-4:4-.' f. Rent estimates • One bedroom$950 + -_--- ,42.;-,5,-1,:r-s':,,:,:,'' • Two bedroom $1050 + g. Application request Vilii5.'54. • Site Development Review with possible adjustments • Site size and zoning designation W---,44kr-f-- \-_, •... 'k'''.: :'-?..4 If you would like to comment on or provide correction to the agenda or minutes as reported by Evergreen Builders,please email your concerns to daryl@jmwproperties.com VV :S I S § h. Zoning Requirements • Density • Setbacks, buffering, screening ,, • Parking , '4 • Landscaping F i. Bus Shelter construction at Greenburg Road jb 1.- riy YY ;, . dr? i ` '�,,f 4. Open Forum For Questions 1+ ii .1f4- t`:T w.,; 5. Summary and Conclusion 1-::w TM NOTES: `1 , ... ;; ; tsvg }. 79 ' y nW.. a ", } Y 3Ni !L L.0 F ryV ,. = ,:w4, 9 t�gt . � j A r" ��r- il"a' r 8 g • , Ili ' 1. 4 �TJS.^ ,Y y... w�t ;Y r41,0^ GS fs ' y 4 <j 1 , -yam , If you would like to comment on or provide correction to the agenda or minutes as reported by Evergreen Builders, please email your concerns to daryl@jmwproperties.com • STATEMENT OF PURPOSE THE FOLLOWING NOTICE SHALL BE READ TO ATTENDEES AT THE BEGINNING OF A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. This meeting is regarding GREf�1�uRCr'FoAp /AIsTS.,located at 9564 5W GRegrt5u7.t,lj and is being held as required by the City of Tigard development review process. The purpose of this meeting is to inform neighbors of the project as currently planned. This meeting is not a decision forum and is not to approve or disapprove the project in whole or in part. It is to share information regarding the project and to solicit constructive input from neighbors and affected property owners. Application for the project being discussed here has not yet been submitted to the City. Therefore, the project will be at various stages of planning and some details may not be available at this time. Property owners of record within 500 feet should have received neighborhood meeting information . and a list of frequently asked questions along with the notice of this meeting. This meeting is not attended by city staff in order to encourage dialogue between the developer and affected neighbors. Your comments and questions will be taken down and submitted with the application for consideration by the city planning staff. Property owners within 500 feet will be notified after a complete application is submitted. They will be provided an opportunity to comment. Any appeals are decided based on the provisions of applicable laws and the development code. For questions regarding the development review process,please contact the City of Tigard Planning Department For project details,you will need to contact the developer. • l\CUaPIN\masters\PtrAppliouon Conference Packet\Neighborbood Meeting Statement of Purposedoc Updated 3/25/2013 • • • Z Ai.M Am S. Mwwe AS Mr. IIY .w.+. =ip pond defll'tuuil 1Npe'a• ]1 n 1 1 .(. p o 9M s•Iv a Pa'1 rti a 7. M• • p•1 . m1 CIS 0 oan p•1 !�.��. p•( Ffm • o L. 4 I T. ' f { . / B " " 8 .-• a I.1 °1 8 . y9 t 171 I64 i d0/rw'.•.' w cw bD Oi b''^ w. Iaw SOD Nd[JlA WOD M310111 I,Na 1 CA 1 1 6 I IIPP .— -.• -- ro _1j,_ `l / )'1 �+F1R, . . Oa a.r y q I it% e.tr . . 4.b. " . . ..,•:),,.....,..i.,: mormirialm..-.... - - f P W • ♦i fz il..:{ TT.T +�{,A? .' Sc4 Fry ..rim r-: -'',;+y C4I ,�' I grow Nor I�q RUHk[ JUIHd I� ' °'1 0 a .. r r r ^(' 1 .r II�IFIIfIlY7 K° ° i t.:.. : [ ;� ° r r_ -v . ^l r; r 1 • Qv ° v as rr `J ' y � d� l •ra r,z,: 1 iy Q II r.n ..-... � �.....� 1 + Z. ` 1 � ' 8 falcon 4f '.'Y 3 4AVt2:Yi CR e a•v.r.ow .vnow nr r CD p 5 Et FIRST 41,,Wi PLAN i d •M._r. YIr 7.MT YY n.Y.N. w 111•.t.0 1 • • • q:'.! I.:I .. ..„.„, • „,„,. tim.,.,, 'h� y��l• ra� '- 1 ;u; +.i ° 1!IIIHIHIIH 11111 iNIIIIHH1111101P —I alP; 1 = {�; 111HIIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IINI®IIIH ii ,01 ,E — lllllll I, . , D -- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Illlillli loan*"`"`!I � ''' °'IIHNIIIIII 811NIIIIHHNIIIIIHH! S{S:Rti�': (,.)ts y 4 ti.: t.• .....,, 0 t. I ' ;;t`, t n .. ;il S ''lllhIIIIIIIIHIIIIIHIIIIHIIIIIHIIIIr' T. , ��� Ililill�l IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIlIII • _. bit- ......:, .. mull HIIIIIIIII IIINIIIII)\11\) I ,, n n i, �IAIO� JI iI-._I!IIIIIII --- 'IIIIIIII.1IIi11 .IIIIeIIIIIIIIII i ;,s !tt,, -,, i tt ,aF'0.�. •{t„i Ita . �' • it=si.c ys t.iiv , it}' 19 i.0 E - IIIOIIIfF 10011111 IININHr' . JNI811HI Iidlillllh 111101101 ,..„,,,...„...,,,,.._..„., • r,e i' 1 GREENBURGRD •r � rt c: ELEVATIONS AND ROOF PLAN JAMES R. ZACHRISON,P.E. 1 ipi yi„ is !II �� �� o C P R.P .11 / P P y f•P I.I ,11 l•f, I/ r P r P•f, 044.1 t z1 — iF lips .410. __ 1 a a il v. mas row maw am. .1111111/1.111/10M11.11M ezin ri woe r., r., ti Itui0 el El1 ■ ic :finMar: C L ■1 ©�a I, itw l•VI ,'!I1NmiII i' pawn ,.P /.V M1P f.P FO y., ; n,s f FIlilltpif PINT n,..* Mil 4 w.slsn w.M Or eW„ 2 • • • e my , ns r r.r y r.r r,v n•v o,vJPr.v 4 Il -, CIS "'7 a4 € tate ft&iiwee ISM itMgB ulio a IM SW A e ® e FNR fQ PMN on 1 r w•v { , v.v i a.v r.r.or.a r rillik"IQ Rg 1 MI ____ _ 4 fi ci M 14 IA. py ar Ar nr i rEni AID C I " (14 r.v r.r r.v.v.nua � ILl 141 :.v.l.raor .r C4 , !.v 4 , ".a... »1r Mfg ++w v_w IIFCONR PLAN �!4 WV M r .r w.K 2 • . • ., . . . .• . . . 7.7 Date: Monday, March l0h, 2014 Time: 6:30 pm Location: Metzger Elementary School Library MEETING AGENDA: 1. Introduction a. Reading of aty required Statement of Purpose for Neighborhood Meetings (attached) Attachment pointed out to attendees and read aloud. b. Why is a neighborhood meeting required The city has established boundaries for neighborhood notification. Developer is required to meet with those interested neighbors and to share conceptual plans of what is being proposed. Neighborhood feedback is encouraged based on information provided. 2. Project Team Introductions a. Bruce Vincent, Bedsaul/Vincent Consulting, LLC, planning consultant b. Joe Westerman, Evergreen Builders, owner c. Daryl Retzlaff, Evergreen Builders, project manager d. Clay Harrington, Evergreen Builders, superintendent Introductions were made, Joe was introduced as an owner/builder with over 20 years of experience building and managing apartment communities similar to the proposed project. 3. Overview of Project Components a. Project name, Greenburg Road Apartments (site plan attached) b. Project address, 9550 SW Greenburg Road roughly 1.5 acres. c. Time line for application submittal Based on a March or April submittal to the city, construction would not be estimated to start until late September as a best case scenario. d. Design Criteria within Washington Square Regional Center Plan District Process requires site development review, which requires detailed site plan showing detailed look at landscaping and parking, as well as, elevations of buildings on the Greenburg frontage. Process does not require a public hearing, and both public and the developer can appeal the process. e. Proposed building and unit types As shown at the meeting 63 units with the possibility of 66. • 1 bedroom, 704 sq. feet(building elevation and floor plan attached) 33 units • 2 bedroom, 985 sq. feet(building elevation and floor plan attached) 18-21 units f you would like to comment on or provide correction to the agenda or minutes as reported by Evergreen Builders,please email your concerns to daryl@jmwproperties.corn • 2 bedroom over garage, 1007 sq. feet (building elevation and floor plan attached) 12 units f. Rent estimates noted . • One bedroom $950 + • Two bedroom $1050 + g. Application request • Site Development Review with possible adjustments Adjustment possibilities if they cannot be worked out as the plans are being massaged: 1. Parking spaces are a few short of the number required by Tigard standards. 2. Adjustment would include only one driveway entrance. Traffic engineer documenting engineering and traffic analysis to submit to Tigard and Washington County. • Site size and zoning designation MAU-1 zone, mixed use employment. High density office and housing with building up to 200'tall. h. Zoning Requirements • Density: Density for 1.5 acre property at 50 units per acre would be a maximum of 75 units. 63-66 units is well under the maximum. • • Setbacks, buffering, screening Buffer level C (8'with landscaping and site obscuring fence) along East boundary. Buffer level A at west (10'with landscaping. Buffer level N/A at North and South boundary. • Parking 93 spaces 14 for guest parking leaves the current design about 8 short. Site design is still being worked on trying to maximize parking. If additional spaces cannot be found a variance will have to be • filed. • Landscaping 20% total landscaping is required for outdoor areas. Requirements are dose to being met based on current design. i. Bus Shelter construction at Greenburg Road Metro and Tri Met have both been contacted about adding a bus shelter to the site design to encourage mass transit and to help ease the parking requirements. • 4. Open Forum For Questions 1. Storm water drainage where will it go. The neighbors expressed concern about current run off from vacant field into their yards. Currently applicant does not know where the storm out flow will be, but there will be no draining from one property to the next once construction is completed, so storm water runoff should improve for the neighbors to the East. 2. Setbacks. Plans are showing 5'to the North and South and 8'to the East with a 6'site obscuring fence. Evergreen is proposing chain link with slats. The neighbors asked about the possibility of a taller fence and windows on the end of the building. Currently no windows are shown on the east end of the building and a taller fence would need to be approved. 3. Concern about home owner property values and privacy issue. Evergreen stressed that they would meet city requirements for property usage and screening. 4. Traffic concerns. There was much discussion about how new developments on Hall Blvd. and 92nd in Washington County drive through their neighborhood. 5. Impact on Metzger Elementary which is already at or near capacity. Concern about more low income apartment people moving into the neighborhood. Concern about the number of apartment and housing projects proposed or started in the Metzger neighborhood. Evergreen response was that with a majority of one bedroom units that few children will live on the • property. This is a market rent property and though laws will be changing with regards to low income residents this will not be a subsidized low income complex. 6. Location of bus shelter. If allowed, it would be located on either side of the main entrance on •• Greenburg, as directed by Tri Met. 7. Jim Long requested minutes and a copy of the attendance sheet. 8. A recap of the neighbors main concerns were fence, increased traffic, storm runoff and school crowding. f you would like to comment on or provide correction to the agenda or minutes as reported by Evergreen Builders,please email your concerns to daryl@jmwproperhes.com 5. Summary and Conclusion . Joe Westerman stressed that he has built, owns and manages numerous properties very similar to what is being propose here. He spoke of pride of ownership and urged people to visit his existing communities in Portland and Vancouver to see what the properties he owns look like. The neighbors were reminded to sign in and leave their email address to receive a copy of the minutes from the meeting. The meeting concluded just after 7:30 pm. NOTES: • you would like to comment on or provide correction to the agenda or minutes as reported by Evergreen Builders,please email your concerns to daryl@jrnwproperties.corn AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE• THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE CITY OF TIGARD A COPY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME TIME PROPERTY . OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE,TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-8189 IN ADDITION,THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT&COPIES OF ALL NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. MAILING: th I, ( yt ((GIr'1-(,;25 7G t being duly sworn,depose and say that on the �Q ay of Fe;l 'rGfaety 20/ I caused to have mailed to each ofJ h�e persons t e attached list,a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed d pmeat at (or near) 9`c5 ) 4/x, U/Z�e'n L / /°/ i- O t `J f , 973' a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envsl,oppes plainly ad�tjsssed to,sail persons an w e de osited on tb date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at /:2tZ/() 1) /76;/f sr`i'e-e'77r 7 eW ( r, 17223 - lire with postage prepaid thereon. / Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) POSTING,: C'f �/<� 'r k 7� � r do ai mat i am(represent)the patty initiating interest in a pmpuscd land we application for / o f O ' rX affecting the Land locatS,d sett (state tl2p approximate loci ion()IF no addr (s)and all tax lot(s)currently registered) 75a ICJ lo!'t'cmoayY FG} // dreT 2r 97-4? ur did on tbeZci • day of s' I^ 2014' peFsonally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a 0/rP eti f'YI/i r' land use application,and the rime,date and place of a neighborhood meetin to discuss the proposal The sign was posted at C_/'e&y/ 4 t?C.-1 s /P� /(moo 7LC P (State the location you posted notice on property) / Ignature (In presence of a Notary Public) S SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE ) County off )ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the/ y of \J . rt) i:1*. OFFICIAL SEAL J p )UUE VELEY g A O 11JJ NO :=I PUBLIC OREGON ) `• �� COMMISSION NO.46a133 (' NOTARY PUBLIC OF ORE N (/MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DECEMBER OB 2015 9My Commission Expires: g/r. i-\(;URPI-N\Mastro\Pm-Application Can fcrcncc}' kcs\,ifFda.it of Mai}ing-Pasting Ncinhbodtood istatingdoar Updated 3/25/1013 • NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING 2014 REVISED MEETING DATE February 20t,2014 RE: Greenburg Road Project Dear Interested Party: I, Joe Westerman,am the owner of the property located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, OR 97223. I am considering proposing the building of a new apartment complex at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary land use approvals, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Monday, March 10`s,2014 Metzger Elementary School Library 10350 SW Lincoln Street Tigard,OR 97223 6:30 PM 111/ Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the city. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you_Please call Clay Harrington at (503) 975-0408 or email clay@jmwproperties.com if you have any questions. Sincerely, Joe Westerman Owner • • - ler NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING ATTENDANCE ROSTER PROJECT: G RGENBuSacs "1 DAn -PAZrm.E.r tZS MEETING DATE: 'S1 lo ' I PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY! PRINTED NAME FULL MAILING ADDRESS & CITY, STATE ZIP CODE PHONE # E-MAIL ADDRESS �- tRtL ET'ZLAPF '-ijp¢gt.Qartw e,�?£e,-,ES. covv-• `ribAZb 02 Q12z3 S031p80•004•s EV uc�V 6 Wc'-,a r FO k S 1 l t, L L-7 0Z/L ci2- c(.-?14- L-en. `--)01.el ale✓t- V f.4 q co o c a, c c_N-f,,,v-rtf.,r f 5cle ce 5 7 a 1 6 c° ?s Lia Qq7 it- 5C96— 'W�5 i eI k+1Ar✓ T"1,5114 c,!/"A 1) 6/1 T/F r cam [I&-j4 4 YJ ?" 72 z 3 S°3 -3/i- v Ezi 2:/ 4 -L° Jt5 /G /3cZ 2 0275— 7- 17.ESI SD✓ y z- " ` 6 . 1 sL ? .91r d'i ?Son-}- fr ce-m vrNGam^+ I SPt-vffilrA}- qrc 6s sw g2.,Q1 re_. , 'T oaf 77223 5-03ctDlS3zo �G ., C GAc--" 61 IS So Lc�,,.o„, cp— -rt5e-off t o e 1-7-zz3 S-1I-73z-3S3s 107 sw ` 2'' J ►^r\ �r —uo,.e15 �y4�.b , (22-2.-3 0a;1/ , 2 7 -223 7-o3 '4 ? ,3 ( S 4/ Lt i V / --en 5 qf-r 2� eV", y � s_z., > L. Area Notified (500 Ft) •Or 744• Beaverton e,if)o`'co �'� r 9550 SW GREENBURG RC N 500' MAILING LABELS BLUM hs,,,,,,Z;4.4 FOpRCREST r__1 L 0 H rri qm G \ — • — \\ a -ego SUMMIT SUMMIT DR I : : Subject Sale L l o `•• •••••••••••`. ¢ ••••••••••••••••`R •••••••••. WpSHINGTON SQUARE RD C ••� forrnatiDrliS Yard •�•�••••••••••O foPrapmonthefromerly owner die date printed On ("......". z ••���•�•�����•�• B O• B E R S ST his map. w I w W /e 'a Cc ij . / . \d1. r �� Qz N1 ' Lu a Mop Punted 19•Feb44 Crescent -- H Grove ` / �EHMAN ST c Cemetery 1' 1 .. `— O1 N1arm Men an Intom•o�•Ir a•n.rw now. 4... 1. 7l`1YE.lid r.N.nhn•,le a r.. n,m n.D wem>mml M rvw.,Omwu. c� AMA IS0/RIVE O PROM MULTIPLE IOVAC CS.IMF CITY Of 111AP0 t 1 WAKES NOT WARRANTY,RE PAEBEMATION,OR OUARA1416e AB"ICI THE CO M ENT.ACCURACY.VIIILM @ ORCOMPLI TINE 61 OP SHY OP THE I DATA PROVIDEO MLR En*THE CITP OP TIOARO CPA IA AM 4E 1.0 UBACIUTY FORAM,ERRORS.01.810W1,0R INACCLRACIBE IN Ink INFORMATION PROVICIO AICARDLI1e OP MOW CAUSED ra p COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1 CORAL ST ■ • — uD A P I.ce o C all Home' TI Sa *RI Ir fIGAMM{PS a CID Q�U�R�� . 503 829�t71SLr•• 1 1 1 .. 1S126DC11400 GRECO EST HOMEOWNERSASSOCIA 1S126DC01901 00000 HARPER, CHARLES F JR 4620 SW PALATINE ST • PORTLAND OR 97219 1S126DC08200 LAW, ROBERT M multiple: 15126DC10600 to 1S126DC10900 12655 SW NORTH DAKOTA LF 8 LLC TIGARD OR 97223 5285 MEADOWS RD, STE 171 LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035 1S126DC07900 1S126DC00900 TIGARD, CITY OF RES-OR TIGARD LLC 13125 SW HALL 730 NW 107TH AVE STE 400 TIGARD OR 97223 MIAMI FL 33172 multiple: 1 S 126DB04200 to 1 S126D805300 1 S126DC 10300 AAA PROPERTIES INC COURIAN, KENNETH J & TERRY E TRU 16501 NE 65TH CT 9109 SW LEHMAN ST VANCOUVER WA 98682 TIGARD OR 97223 18126DC00204 BEILSTEIN, STEVEN S 1S126DC00501 19384 SW LEBEAU RD GARD, PATRICIA L TRUST SHERWOOD OR 97140 9145 SW BORDERS ST TIGARD OR 97223 26DC00902 1S126DC01801 ARPENTER,WESCOTT G GARD, RICHARD E JR& JOLIN M 2023 NE 42ND AVE 9150 SW BORDERS ST PORTLAND OR 97213 PORTLAND OR 97223 1S1260003300 15126DC01005 ATHERTON REALTY PARTNERSHIP NOBLE,ALBERT 2100 S WOLF DES PLAINES IL 60018 9158 SW 169TH BEAVERTON OR 97007 1S126DC01006 1 S126DCO2600 JOYCE, DON H WLKS, ROBERT E ?26 NW HERMOSA BLVD 9170 SW LEHMAN ST 'ORTLAND OR 97210 PORTLAND OR 97223 S126DC01003 1 S126DB06100 .EHMAN STREET PROPERTIES LLC MARJAMA, CINDY 216 SW SCHOLLS FERRY CT 9185 SW MONTAGE LN 'ORTLAND OR 97221 TIGARD OR 97223 S126DC07000 15126DC01902 /IEK, DAVID JC NEUNZERT. MICHAEL EICAROLINE B SW 43RD AVE 9221 SW LEHMAN ST LAND OR 97221 TIGARD OR 97223 1S126DC01101 1S126DC00201 HERBST, BRANDON UJANA M ROSS, TROY A 9245 SW LEHMAN ST 9510 SW 91ST AVE •IGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 1S126DB05400 1S126DC00301 HABEGER, DONALD E & CAROL A BLASZAK, NATHAN J 9300 VIEW DR 9520 SW 92ND AVE JUNEAU AK 99801 PORTLAND OR 97223 1S126DC01100 1S126DC00800 BRAAM, PIETER H M 1992 TRUST GILLMAN, EVA 9315 SW LEHMAN ST 9525 SW 92ND AVE PORTLAND OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 1S126DC09100 1S126DC08600 FITTERER, ANGELITA MEADOR, RICK S & HEIMEL, SUSI 9316 SW LEHMANN ST 9555 SW 92ND AVE TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 1S126DC09400 1S126DC06900 BURNESS,THOMAS SAWYER RUPERT, KRISTINA J 9330 SW LEHMANN ST 9560 SW 92ND AVE TIGARD OR 97223 PORTLAND OR 97223 26DC01001 1 S126DC08700 OBEY, MARSHA L PHILLIPS, JASON C &HEATHER C 9335 SW LEHMAN ST 9565 SW 92ND AVE TIGARD OR 97223 PORTLAND OR 97223 1S126DC01002 1S126DC00400 ANAST,ANGELINE V REAM, LLOYD W JR MABEL 9355 SW LEHMAN 9570 SW 92ND PORTLAND OR 97223 PORTLAND OR 97223 1S126DC01004 1S126DC08100 ROTH, JEFFREY A& BETTY A RANDOL, JAMES D & DONNA M 9445 SW LEHMANN 9589 SW 92ND AVE TIGARD OR 97223 PORTLAND OR 97223 1 S126D805600 1 S126DC08000 EPSTEIN, DANIEL & BREANNA LONGORIA, EMILIYA&EDDIE 3456 SW 92ND AVE 9611 SW 92ND AVE TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 S126DB05500 1S126DC01200 )IXON, CAMERON GIPSON,TERESA F ifili SW 92ND AVE 9665 SW 92ND AVE iippRD OR 97223 PORTLAND OR 97223 1S126DC01201 1S126DB06200 BOWMAN, DIANE M COMBS, KRISTOPHER BUXTON '705 SW 92ND AVE BUXTON, JFANA (GARD OR 97223 9193 SW MONTAGE LN TIGARD OR 97223 1S126DC01102 1S126DB02800 MILLER,THOMAS M DOROTHY FRANKLIN COMMONS ASSOCIATES, LLC 9745 SW 92ND AVE BY NORRIS&STEVENS PORTLAND OR 97223 621 SW MORRISON STE 800 PORTLAND OR 97205 1S126DC01900 1S126CD00100 HENRIQUEZ, MB ALICIA CRESCENT GROVE CEMETERY ASS 9750 SW 92ND AVE CRESCENT GROVE CEMETERY PORTLAND OR 97223 9925 SW GREENBURG ROAD TIGARD OR 97223 1S126DCD3002 1S126DB00900 PERRY, STEPHEN W DICK,TILLIE TRUST 9860 SW 92ND AVE DICK, ROBERT FAMILY CR SHELTER TRUS TIGARD OR 97223 10995 SW 111TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 1S126DC07800 multiple: 1S126DB06600 to 1S126DB07000 LEHMANN SQUARE HOMEOWNERS BROWNSTONE ON THE SQUARE ASSOCIATION HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 19305 ROBIN CIR#55 00000 WEST LINN OR 97068 26DB02900 1 S126DC01302 FRANKLIN COMMONS ASSOCIATES LLC HOVANIC, JOSEPH G ATTN: BRAD SIMMONS HOVANIC,JENNIFER L 7820 SW WILLOWMERE DR 9653 SW 92ND AVE PORTLAND OR 97225 TIGARD OR 97223 1S126CA00300 1S126DC08300 SFP-F LLC 2000-006 PARTITION PLAT, OWNERS ATTN: PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNTING LOTS 1 THRU 3 PO BOX 5350 00000 BEND OR 97708 1S126DC01800 1S126DC00901 JOVEN CO GETHSEMANE EVANGELICAL 4TTN: STEVEN J BITTE LUTHERAN CHURCH BOX 19815 9640 SW GREENBURG RD ORTLAND OR 97280 PORTLAND OR 97223 I S 126DC00500 multiple: 1 S 1260000300 to 1 S 126CD00200 2EAM, SHARON L PPR WASHINGTON SQUARE LLC IRINDLEY, NORMAN PO BOX 847 1165 SW BORDERS ST CARLSBAD CA 92018 'ORTLAND OR 97223 S126DC00206 1S126DC01700 'UCK, JEANNIE MILNER STEPHENS. KRISTIN M EDWARD DALE RICE, HALCYON M CHANDA JANE TRUST ET AL 9130 SW BORDERS ST 44 WYNOOSKI ST PORTLAND OR 97233 EWBERG OR 97132 1 S 126DC03302 MURRAY, DOUGLAS J TILLIE A 40450 SW LEHMAN ORTLAND OR 97223 multiple: 1S126DC07100 to 1S126DC07700 WEEKS, H&D LIFETIME TRUST WEEKS, HOWARD B DISCLAIMER TRUST 16025 SW AUDOBON ST#104 BEAVERTON OR 97006 • EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Service Provider Letters • • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 CleanWater Services • April 07, 2014 EVERGREEN BUILDERS 7420 SW HUNZIKER ROAD SUITE A TIGARD OR 97223 Re: CWS file 14-000384 (Tax map 1S126DC Tax lot 00900); Residential Development Clean Water Services has reviewed your proposal for the above referenced activity on your site. Following review of submitted materials it appears that Sensitive Areas do not exist on-site or within 200'from.your project. In light of this result, this document will serve as your Service Provider letter as required by Resolution and Order 07-20, Section 3.02.1. All required permits and approvals must be obtained and completed under applicable local, state, and federal law. • This concurrence letter does NOT eliminate the need to protect additional Sensitive Areas if they are subsequently identified on your site. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (503) 681-3653. Sincerely, Amber Wierck Environmental Plan Review • '550 SW Hillsboro Highway • Hillsboro,Oregon 97123 'hone:(503)681-3600 • Fax(503)681-3603 • cleanwaterservices.org • WASTE MANAGEMENT October 13th, 2014 Daryl Retzlaff Evergreen Builders,LLC Re: Design Plans for Greenburg Road Apartments. Daryl, Waste Management of Oregon-Washington County Operations, has reviewed the design plans for Greenburg Road Apartments in Tigard, Oregon. We have determined that we can adequately access and provide garbage and recycling collection services with our equipment within the proposed site design. • Sincerely, Darin Flaig Route Manager Waste Management of Oregon • cv4) ilii!W i al OM a 51. VICINITY MAP 4.g ig Pq 3 •�X �r tr1il1 .A111011440000610\ 1.1.111ii P111114, • �— \ masYw ,/,,,,,,, -...,...„ fffilldi Ber \ 0 0 ..,..,.., va t 9w \ o• ® o 0o a. V9 �l ® M1m RM YfNJ .` 'OI VMy:"KWI{ ;< Ywgn O qw,w /�./ ?4'n,Vl. Y.9gn ' ,rmWtvV, inwOMOXKY VOI4411 ,n-- • — r wt,WN/Y aggn ,41M[Ywm ; •a e,�gM, y "' ,\ \ ® ,G B Q 6 © '!srot' 1'*�' / __ _ a I Y'""'" n it III= 110 Id II,tlJggn \ a ' yam, �+,� � WgY¢,wW , Y qn \ Ili spris IN ago II rn a IRpa:I, s — � � r — II a v —1— VAM•iir.Y uaxnw.a 544:10' wWOW MI Y,YLI p• •,.. UN a✓°wN y. Yw. 1•.1P0' • • 0 • • _ I. a+ ll 3 .® www.hifr.com Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue EMERGENCY SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER THIS IS NOT AN APPROVAL The Fire District has personnel and equipment in the area that can respond to an emergency incident and implement such actions as may be necessary for fire and/or rescue operations at the address cited below: For planning purposes,access and fire fighting water supply complying with fire code requirements shall be included on plans submitted to the City of Tigard. See approved (stamped)plan for additional information. Signed: Date: - John W Deputy Fire Marshal II . Tualatin Valley Fire&Rescue 503-259-1504 9550 SW Greenburg Rd Tigard OR 97223 JMW Properties �orth Operating Center Command[k Business O 2066S SW Blanton Street enpetatlons Center South Operating Center and Central Operating renter Training Center Aloha,Oregon 97007-1042 11945 SW 70m Avenue 7401 SW Washo Court 12400SW Tonquin Road rnai,t„ nre,n„ Daryl Retzlaff From: Wolff, John F. <John.Wolff@tvfr.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 5:25 PM To: daryl@jmwproperties.com Cc: Agnes Kowacz Subject: FW: Greenburg Road Apartments Attachments: Greenburg Apts Alternate Means and Methods Approval.pdf Daryl, Attached is the stamped approval of your proposal . The approved AM&M request and response letters must be blue lined on the plans prior to plan approval. Retain a copy of the AM&M proposal and response at the project site at all times. This documentation may be required for review by TVF&R inspection staff. The approved AM&M request and response letters must be blue lined on the plans prior to plan approval. Retain a copy of the AM&M proposal and response at the project site at all times. This documentation may be required for review by TVF&R inspection staff. Thank you, John Wolff I Deputy Fire Marshal II Sualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Direct: 503-259-1504 www.tvfr.com From: Wolff, John F. Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 4:13 PM To: daryl@jmwproperties.com Cc: Gary Pagenstecher Subject: FW: Greenburg Road Apartments Daryl, Your submitted AM&M proposal surrounding the Greenburg Road Apts provides an equivalent level of protection considering all related conditions pertaining to the project, TVF&R will issue a response letter granting approval. Such approval may be conditional upon implementation of additional requirements listed in the AM&M response letter that were not part of the original AM&M proposal. Approval is granted Only for the specific project under review, and the conditions for approval shall not be construed as applicable to any other project. t The approval letter will be issued the first of next week. This e-mail can serve as temporary approval of your proposal until the official letter is provided to you and the City of Tigard from TVF&R. John Wolff I Deputy Fire Marshal II Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Direct: 503-259-1504 www.tvfr.com From: Wolff, John F. Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 10:56 AM To: Daryl Retzlaff Subject: RE: Greenburg Road Apartments Daryl, I apologize for any delay on my part in getting back to you. I was out of the office on Monday and ended up at work yesterday but out of the office responding to incidents all day... Yes I have received your documents and they are in the process for review. We should ave an answer for you with in a day or two. It is pending my bosses approval. I will wioump him again today and see if I can get a more definite time frame for your approval or better yet, your approval! Thanks for your patience, John From: Daryl Retzlaff f mailto:daryl@jmwprooerties.coml Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 8:07 AM To: Wolff, John F. Subject: Greenburg Road Apartments John, I wanted to confirm that you received my Alternate Materials and Methods Request that I brought in last Thursday. I would also like to know if you have an estimation of how long your review will take. Thanks Daryl Retzlaff Project Manager Evergreen Builders, LLC. (503) 680-0045 • 2 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • August 4,2014 John Wolff Deputy Fire Marshall II Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue 11945 SW 70th Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 SUBJECT: AM&M Proposal for the Greenburg Road Apartments AM&M Request Number 1 . Site Design Review,Case File 5DR2014-00002 Mr. Wolff, In accordance with OFC D106 of the 2010 Oregon Fire Code, Evergreen Builders, LLC. Is requesting an alternate means of fire protection for the proposed apartment complex detailed below.This is in response to the email dated July 21, 2014 sent from John Wolff of TVF&R to Agnes Kowacz of the City of Tigard.The email references Fire Department access and fire apparatus turnaround for the Greenburg Road Apartments submitted under City of Tigard case File Number SDR2014-00002. Project Information TUAIATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE APPROVED n Project: Greenburg Road Apartments CONDITIONALLY APPROVED 9550 SW Greenburg Rd. APPROVAL OF PLANS IS NOT AN APPROVAL OF oIAISSIONS OR OVERSIGHTS. Tigard,OR 97223 SEEDAM 8 YN � • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard,OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • Owner: Joe Westerman, Evergreen Builders, LLC 7420 SW Hunziker Rd.,Suite D Tigard,OR 97223 Contact: Daryl Retzlaff, Evergreen Builders, LLC Project Manager (503)680-0045 daryl@jmwproperties.com PROPOSAL The proposed property is located in the City of Tigard, in Washington County.The property is bordered by a 100 foot frontage to the west along Greenburg Road,an apartment complex to the North,single family residences to the east and a church to the South.The property is roughly 480'deep. • The configuration of the property prohibits compliance with the requirement of having a secondary means of access for fire department vehicles(OFC D106.1).The property is land locked on three sides with no available route for a secondary access.The narrow frontage on Greenburg does not allow enough room for multiple accesses. Based on our meeting with John Wolff of TVF&R on July 22,2014, Evergreen Builders would like to propose the following alternate means and methods not currently shown on the site plan: 1. Construct a 20 foot wide dead-end fire apparatus access road turnaround as detailed in OFC D103.1 and as shown on the revised site plan. (attached) 2. Install two fire hydrants in locations shown on the revised site plan per OFC 507.5.1 and table C105.1. 3. Upgrade proposed NFPA 13R system to a full NFPA 13 system at the recommendation of TVF&R and per OFC D106.1 exception. JUSTIFICATION The addition of the fire apparatus turn around would bring the site into compliance with OFC 503.2.5, and the added fire hydrants would be installed and spaced per OFC Appendix C table C105.1. Hydrants would be installed within 100'of fire department connections on all buildings with the exception of the • building on the east of the property which would be about 105'. In addition,the automatic fire sprinkler 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • system would be upgraded to a full NFPA 13 system that would help to suppress any fire until adequate numbers of emergency personnel arrive at the site. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Thank you for considering our proposal.We feel that the items outlined above address the items of concern that were brought to our attention by TVF&R and discussed in the above referenced meeting. Attached is a revised site plan detailing our proposed changes. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding this AM&M proposal. Thank you Daryl Retzlaff • Evergreen Builders • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 Tualatin Valley Water District Delivering the Best Water Service Value • February 25,2014 Evergreen Builders Attn: Clay Harrington 7420 SW Hunziker Rd.Suite A Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: Statement of Service Availability Dear Mr. Harrington Tualatin Valley Water District has adequate capacity to provide service to Tax Lot 900 (assessor tax map 1S1 26 DC) from the 8-inch water line in SW Greenburg Rd. The proposed use (developer)will make the necessary connections and/or extensions of water mains,as required, to serve the subject property and will be shown on plans submitted for approval prior to connection to the system. • Contact the Tualatin Valley Water District for requirements regarding submittal of plans (3 sets) for review and approval and for review fees or any questions you may have. Sincerely, JJI Stewart L Davis, P.E. Senior Engineer • 1850SW170`hAvenue • Beaverton,Oregon97006 • Phone:503-642-1511 • Fax:503-649-2733 • www.tinvd.or 9 Portland General Electric Company • 1\ PG E $ PO Box 4404•Portland Oregon97708 ` / 02/17/2014 Clay Harrington Evergreen Builders 7420 SW Hunziker Rd Suite#A Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: Proposed construction site at 9550 SW Greenburg Rd, Tigard, Oregon Greenburg Rd Project, PGE Work Request No. (752213) Dear Clay: Thank you for inquiring about electrical services provided through Portland General Electric. Your proposed project located in Tigard, Oregon is within PGE's service territory. PGE has enough electrical capacity to serve your anticipated load. However, in all likelihood, additional infrastructure and electrical equipment will need to be installed to serve this anticipated load. This letter does not address any issues concerned with easements or right-of-ways. The owner/developer is responsible for all costs associated with providing electric service to a new project, including the expenses for realigning existing electric facilities. However, PGE currently has a line extension allowance (LEA) that may help • offset some of the costs of providing electrical service. We calculate the LEA for your project based on an estimate of the yearly incremental kWh consumption. This LEA is subject to change. Please note that the LEA does not apply to certain project expenses involving underground service. The owner/developer is always responsible for the cost of all necessary excavation, trenching, conduit, vaults, submersible transformers, pads and permits. Expenses for providing electric service to a project can be considerable. In order to provide a good cost estimate, PGE must receive your detailed plans and load estimates. When you have this information, please call (503) 736-5450, and a Service and Design Consultant will be assigned to your project and make contact with you. Sin re' •.._(Rico Solis) Service Coordinator Portland General Electric cc: • EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Pre -Application Conference Notes • • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 CITY OF TIGAID • PRE APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES114 (PreApplication,Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) TIGARD ARE-APP.MTG.DATE: lult-,11� 'OW STAFF AT PRE-APP.: )T RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: Joe Westerman Phone: 503-313-4621 AGENT: Phone: PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: 9550 SW Greenburg Road TAX MAP(S)/LOT#(S): IS126 DC00900 NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: Site.Development Review.parking adjusttnentlfl/rrsc ate. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 5, three story multi family buildings (60-70units). 20 garage spaces, 60 parking spaces. L ICOMPREHENSIVE'PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: MUE-1 ZONING MAP DESIGNATION:MUE-1 ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18. 510) MINIMUM LOT SIZE: NONE sq. ft.Average Min. lot width: NONE ft. Max.bldg height: 200 ft. (2 stories min.) MAX.SITE COVERAGE:85% (all bldgs.&imperv.surfaces) Min.landscaped or natural vegetation area: 15%. Setbacks: Front: 0 ft(Max. 20 ft). Side:0** ft Rear:0** ft Corner: Oft(Max.20 ft). from street. Garages: 20 ft Min.Res. Density: SOunits/acre **Side&rear yard setbacks shall be 20'when zone abuts residential districts. ® NEIGHBORHOOD'MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 7-EET, INTERESTED PARTIES,AND THE r ITY OFT[GARn PT can trxTr r,,. 1 v ION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your aDnlication or the application will not be accepted • * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. CITY OF TIG.iRD Pre-application Conference Notes Rc,odentia).lpplieauemiManntng Di pion Srctimt Page 1 of 8 NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Chapter 18.390) The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A:NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable • approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. El IlMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050) As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE AN IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact studyshall development on public facilities and services. The studyata . quantifye ra the effect of the including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, thedwater system, the sewer transportation andme the system, impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of realproperty concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence nw ich suppr s applicant conclusion that property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. ® ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.765) Minimum number of accesses: 2 Minimum access width: 30 feet. Minimum pavement width: 24 feet& 5 foot walkwa re uired. El WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.705) Within all ATTACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling SHALL BE CONNECTED BY WALKWAY TO THE VEHICULAR PARKING AREA,COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES. Eg RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION • The NET.RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOWED on a partiicuullaesit Chapter be 18.715) alculated by dividingbdie net area of the developable land by the minitnum number of square feet required per dwelling unit as specified by the applicable zoning designation. Net development area is calculated by subtracting the following land area(s) from the total site area: All sensitive lands areas including: Land within the 100-year foodplain; Slopes exceeding 25%; Drainageways;and Y Wetlands for the R-1,R-2, R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 zoning districts. Public ri ht-of-wa dedication: Single-family allocate 20%of gross acres for public facilities;or Multi-family allocate 15%0 of gross acres for public facilities;or 1' If available, the actual public facility square n footage can be used for deduction. All land proposed for�nrivate Streets SEE NOTES FOR ESTIMATED DENSITY CALCULATIONS. EXAMPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS: EXAMPLE: USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE (3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE)WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS Single-Family 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area )Multi-Family 8.712.so. ft. (2Oor ublic rinbr-,F wa py 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 6 534 s .ft. 1 S°1° forpublic lit-of-wa NET: 34,848 square feet NET: 37,026 square feet • = 11.4 Units Per Acre (maximum) 3-05th 1pum lot arr 12.1 Units Per Acre( mum) e.IT�"OF TIGARD Pre-application Conference Notes Page 2 of ft • The Development Code requires that the net site area exist for the next whole dwelling unit. NO ROUNDING UP IS PERMITTED. • Minimum Project Density is 80% of the maximum allowed density. TO DETERMINE, MULTIPLY THE MAXIMUM BY.8. •� SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.730) STREETS: feet from the centerline of > FLAG LOT: A TEN (10)-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK applies to all primary structures. S' ZERO LOT LINE LOTS: A minimum of a ten (10)-foot separation shall be maintained between each dwelling unit or garage. > MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL building separation standards apply within multiple-family residential developments. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES UP TO 528 SQUARE FEET in size may be permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in size. Five(5)-foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines_ ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UP TO 1,000 SQUARE FEET on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size. (See applicable zoning district for the primary structures'setback requirements.] ❑ FLAG LOT BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 11/2 STORIES or 25 feet,whichever is less in most zones;21/2 stories,or 35 feet in R-7,R-12, R-25 or R-40 zones provided that the standards of Section 18.730.010.C.2 are satisfied. BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.745) In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the CITY REQUIRES LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREAS along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and • evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes:may be found in the Development Code. The ESTIMATED RE UIRED BUFFERS a licable to our ro osal area is: Buffer Level TYPE C ikalong north boundary. Buffer Level TYPE C Buffer Level TYPE C . along south boundary. Buffer Level TYPE A along east boundary. REQUIRED along west boundary. SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS ALONG:.NORTH SOUTH&EAST. ® - STREET TREES&PARKING LOT TREES (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745 and 18.765) STREET TREES SHALL BE REQUIRED AS PART OF. THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE (TYPE III), DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW PARTITION (TYPE II), PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (TYPE Il &DEVELOPMENT, MINOR' REVIEW (TYPE II), AND SUBDIVISION TYPE II & III) (TYPEum III) SITE be determined by dividing the linear amount of street frontage within o adjacent dja ent two the s of required te (in fee street 0efeet(if the number is a fraction, round to the nearest whole number). The trees shall be placed within the public right-of-way whenever possible but no more than six (6) feet from the right-of-way boundary. Street trees shall be according to Section 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual and adequate soil volumes shall be provided in acc plant o dance with Section 12 of the Urban Forestry Manual. Existing trees may be used to meet the street standards. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. PARKING LOT TREES ARE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR A • CONDITIONAL USE (TYPE III), DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW (TYPE II & III), PLANNED DEVELOPMENT(TYPE III),AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(TYPE II).All parking areas,including parking spaces and aisles, shall be required to achieve at least 30% tree canopy cover at maturity directly above the CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Re id.n iai Appiication/Ilannmg Ihricrn Scroon Page 3 of 8 • parking area in accordance with Section 13 of the Urban Forestry Manual. RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) • Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW OVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure thin clear l AND ar vision area area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Pride Disposal can be reached at(503) 625-6177. ® PARKING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.765 & 18.705) ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED. > Single-family Requires: One (1)off-street parking space per dwelling unit;and One (1) space per unit less than 500 square feet. %' Multiple-family Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom; 1.5 spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms;and 1.75 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms. 32 1-bed. Units:40 spaces 28 2 bed.Units:42 spaces TOTAL:82 spaces + 13(guest parking) = 95 spaces Multi-family dwelling units with more than ten (10) required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall consist of 15%of the total required parking. NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. Parking stalls shall be dimensioned as follows: > Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet. 6 inches X 18 feet, 6 inches. • > Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet. 6 inches X 16 feet, 6 inches. > Handicapped parking: All parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabled person parking spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. ® BICYCLE RACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.765) BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. 1.0 space/2 units = 30 spaces required for 60 units ❑ SENSITIVE LANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.775) The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the res onsibili to recisel identi sensitive land areas and their boundarie is the res onsibili ' of the a licant. Areas meetin the definitions of sensitive lands must be clean indicated onplans submitted with the.development a licatinti. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED ITI11N FLOODPLAINS SOME RESIDENTIAL RELATED DEVELOPMENT IS EXEMPT. STEEP SLOPES (Refer to Code Section 18.775.070.C) When STEEP SLOPES exist,prior to issuance of a final order,a geotechnical report must be submitted which CITY OF't7GARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 • addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. • gl CLEANWATER SERVICES(CWS)Service Provider Letter PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the CWS R&O 07-20 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas,CWS must still issuea letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. ® SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively,a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. ® URBAN FORESTRY PLAN(Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.0 and the "Tree Canopy Requirements" Brochure) AN URBAN FORESTRY PLAN IS REQUIRED FOR THE FOLLWING'TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT: Conditional Use(Type III);Downtown Design Review(Type II and III);Minor Land Partition (Type II); Planned Development (Type III);Sensitive Lands Review(Type II and III);Site Development Review(Type II); and Subdivision (Type II and III). The plan needs to be.prepared by an ISA certified arborist or landscaped architect. Percentage of mature canopy cover required: 33%-YRefer to At pendix 2-6 in Urban Forestry Manual for a list oftreer • min mature canopy rover areas) Percentage of mature canopy cover required per/ot in the R-1,R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5&R-7 zones: 15% • An urban forestry plan shall; - Be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect (the project landscape architect) or a person possessing dual certifications as a certified arborist and certified tree risk assessor(the project arborist); - Meet the tree preservation and removal site plan standards in Section 10, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual; - Meet the tree canopy site plan standards in Section 10,part of the Urban Forestry Manual;and - Meet the supplemental report standards in Section 10,part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. TREE CANOPY FEE. If the effective percentage of tree canopy cover cannot be met, the applicant shall provide the city a tree canopy fee according to the methodology outlined in Section 10, part 4 of the Urban Forestry Manual. 18.790.040-Discretionary Urban Forestry Plan Review Option In lieu of providing payment of a tree canopy fee when less than the standard effective tree canopy cover required by Section 10, part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual will be provided, an applicant may apply for a discretionary urban forestry plan review. The discretionary urban forestry plan review cannot be used to modify an already approved urban forestry plan, any tree preservation or tree planting requirements established as part of another land use review approval, or any tree preservation or tree planting requirements required by another chapter in this title. ® PRESERVATION OF EXISTING TREES (Refer to Code Section 18.790_050.C.) To assist in the preservation and/or planting of trees and significant tree groves, the director may apply one or more of the following flexible standards as part of the land use review approval. Use of the flexible standards • shall be requested by the project arborist or landscape architect as part of the land use review process. The flexible standards are only applicable to trees that arc eligible for credit towards the effective tree canopy cover of the site. CITY OF T IGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes itcsdenrial Application/Planning t)v or,Section Page 5 of 8 Appropriate species of trees in good condition and suitable for preservation receive a 200 percent credit based on their existing canopy area. Refer to Section 11-Part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual for submittal requirements. •® CLEAR VISION AREA (Refer to Code Chapter 18.795) The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BE EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/roadtersections. The TWEN THEE size�oDf the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. The applicant shall show the clear vision areas on the site plan, and identify any obstructions in these areas. ❑ FUTURE STREET PLAN AND EXTENSION OF STREETS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.030.F.) A FUTURE STREET PLAN shall: Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 530 feet surrounding and adjacent to the proposed land division. Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 530 feet of the site. Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed. [1 ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.060) MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. • The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS.SHALL NOT EXCEED 2'/ TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1'/z-times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. ❑ BLOCKS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.040) The perimeter of BLOCI{S FORMED'BY STREETS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2,000 FEET measured along the right-of-way center line except where street location is precluded by natural topography,wetlands or other bodies of water or,pre-existing development. When block lengths greater than 330 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. CODE CHAPTERS ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) 0 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 0 18.760(Nonconfomtitig Situations) ❑ 18.340(Directors Interpretation) 0 18.630(VG'aslrington Square Regional Center) g' ® 18.765r equir (Off-Street Parking/Loading ❑ 18.350(Planned Development) Requirements) ❑ 18.640(Durham Quarry Design ❑ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) Standards) 18.360{Site Development Review) ® 18.705(.access/Egress/Circulation) ® 18.780 St s El 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) 0 18.710(Accessory Residential Units` ( ) 0 18.380(Zoning Irfap/Text / 0 18.790(Uemporary Use Permits) Amendments) 18.715(Density Computations) 18.790(Urban Forestry Plan) ❑ 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) ❑ 18.720(Design Compatibility ® 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) Standards)® 18.390(Decision Making 18.725(Environmental Performance 0 18.798 (1X'ireless Communication Procedures/Impact Study) ❑ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) ® Standards) Fac el 18.730(Exceptions To Development18.810 18.810es) Standards) (Street & Utility Improvement 18.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay) Standards) ITV OF TIGA - pre-application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 ❑ 18.430(Subdivisions) ❑ 18:742(Home Occupation Permits) ❑ 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) ® 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) ® 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) r] 18.750 (Manufactured/Mobil Home • ®❑ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) Regulations) 18.755:(Mixed Solid Waste/Reryding Storage) ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: Provide a narrative that states facts to show how the criteria are met: Referrin to the Ian does not meet the criterion. Narratives that do not rovide facts are considered incom lete and will rolon the review rocess. The site is located within the Washin on ware Re 'onal Center• therefore the develo ment must meet the Washin ton S uare deli standards. The front and for most western-units must be alon Greenbur Road. These units must be oriented t Greenbur Road have connections to Greenbur Road and meet windows articulation variable buildin materials landsca in re uirements. Estimated Densi Calculations: Gross S uare Foo e 66 46 Access&ROW 1.5% 9 996 Net Develo able Area 56650' 65 units .minimum The Washin on S uare cha ter allows an ad ushnent to reduce the minimum b 25°o. Please review ose statement of the Washin on S uare R 'onal Center when addressin the ad'ustrnent criteria. GROCEDURE 122 Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. El Public hearing before the Planning Commission. ❑ Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City submitted b mail or dro d off at the counter without f plann•PLEAv s NOTE: Apnlicatione returned. The Planni counter closes at 5:00 PM. Division acce ranee ma be Ma s.submitted with an a lication shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8r/2" x ll". One 8V2" x l" ma of a ro osed ro.ects all also be submitted for attachment to the staff re ort or administrative decision. A lications with unfolded ma s shall not be acce red. The Planning Division and Engineering Departmentpreliminary will determine whether an applt�on is co llete within 30 days of the onter submittal: Staff will notify the review of the application and applicant if additional information or additional copies.of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Divis Division.P A p actaao s i to 60 nvolving clays ifficult or protracted:issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions mayadditional review. recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the blic[h eating. A�10 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would Hearing s Officer . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is availablep from the Planning be heard by the Tigard Division upon request. Land use applications requicring • less than 10 days prior to gthe p bli cheating hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no :TTY OF TIGARD Pm-Application Conference Notes tasi.kmiaJ Applic nonManning Dicisw n Section Page 7 of 8 This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE A INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant n THE the �a OF THE CONFERENCE ARE requirements applicable to thepotential development of a particular site and to allow the City primary Community Development Code prospective applicant to discuss the oppor�tieS and constraint affecting development of the site. • staff and SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION (County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-8884) PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicants are re aired to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Budding Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are buildingo the structure from code issues that would proposed.prevent Additionally, with. regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions whereany structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlyingparcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the Ci 's olic is to a 1 hs s stem develo ment credits to the first buildtn crmn issued in the deve o ment (U OTH RWISE DEV PER AT THE TIME THE EMOLITION PERMIT IS BTAINED)DIRECTED BY THE PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related planning that should apply to the development of your sire plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that prospective applicant either obtain and read the C questions of City staff Community Development Code or ask any relative to Code re.uirernents 'nor to subnuttin• an as.lication. m . ftADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED PLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6).MONTHS FOLLOWING deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). THIS CONFERENCE (unless PREPARED BY: A lies Kowacz CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP.MEETING PHONE: 503-718-2427 FAX: 503-598-1960 EMAIL: agnesk@tigard-or.gov tigard-or.gov • 11110 ITY OF TTGARD Pre-Application Conference �v1cm,;at Anil;c. - PP Notes urn/Plannmv 7)i.ysiM sernnn Page 8of8 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES • ➢ DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERINGminima.keys Community iDecr(opment s ' )1 • PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Mask 1S126DC Westerman Ants Tax latlsk 900 Use Type: Dilemmas These notes have been prepared based on the information submitted by the applicant showing 60 apartment units on the subject property at 9550 SW Greenburg Rd. The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are aprojection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Greenburg Road in this area is under the jurisdiction of Washington County. The applicant shall meet both County requirements for traffic analysis and street improvements along with City requirements. 1111hThis development will need to meet the Street and Utility Improvement Standards of TMC 18.810 along with e Washington Center Regional Center Design Standards of TMC 18.630. Right-of-wav dedication The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets_ Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: Greenbur Road to a half-width of 49 feet from centerline or wider if re uired b the County) • crrsrntrutmComforting Naos Oeeelolian7 register! Pao:1st5 Street improvements: (Subject to rough pro ortionality) ® Partial street improvements and/or future street improvement agreements (where allowed) will be necessary along_Greenburg Road to include: . ® pavement half-width of 34 feet or wider if required by the County `' ® concrete curb ® 5-foot planter exclusive of curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 10-foot concrete sidewalk } ® street trees ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ® Other: Pavement tapers as necessary It appears that the trip generation of the proposed development will be less than the TMC 18.810 threshold for requiring a traffic study. 18.705 Access and Egress The development will need to meet County standards and requirements for access to Greenburg Rd. While TMC 18.705 would require a second access for this number of dwellingunits, it is to the surrounding developed properties and short frontage on Greenburg Road, multiple accuses will not be ossible. The application will need to demonstrate this. � 18.730.040 Additional Setback Re uirements: This section sets requirements for additional setback distance from roadways. The minimum yard requirement shall be increased in the event a yard abuts a street having a right-of-way width less than required by its functional classification on the city's transportation plan map and, in such case, the setback shall be not less than the setback required by the zone plus one-half of the projected road width as shown on the transportation map. This appears to not be applicable A reement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s)to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: (1.) This appears to not be applicable (2.) Overhead lltil. Lines: Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent • to a development to be placed underground or, if approved by the City Engineer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite Cm OF TICARB P Conference Mara uwi.aom ummeedif side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is approved, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines across the street along Greenburg Rd, for which the fee-in-lieu will be •necessary. All new utilities will need to be constructed underground. Sanitary Sewers: The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It appears that a sewer line runs along Greenburg Rd. It is possible that a connection could be made to the east. The developer will need to verify adequacy for the proposed use and pay the appropriate connection fees. Contact the Utility Billing staff for connection fees. Water Suppw: The Tualatin Valley Water District provides public water service in this area. Coordinate with TVWD for information regarding adequate water supply and appropriate connection requirements for the proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District [Contact: John Wolff, 503-259-1504] provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: • All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. Provide a plan that shows how the storm drainage system for the site connects to the public system. Storm drainage plan and calculations shall be submitted with the application for it to be considered complete. Storm water detention is required for any increase in impervious area. Storm water detention facilities must be reviewed and approved by the city. Storm water detention calculations shall be submitted to the Development Engineer for review and approval. Storm drainage must connect to a public system of adequate capacity or discharge to a suitable outfall location meeting appropriate standards (such as CWS). Storm Water Quality; The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The resolution • contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in- lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious surfaces Cm OF TIGARtt Pre-Ann lop Conference Naas PEN 3N5 created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof. Please contact the Building Division for the current fee. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ® Construction of an on-site water quality facility. • I I Payment of the fee in-lieu. Water quality treatment is required. Calculations for sizing of water quality treatment facilities must be submitted to the Development Engineer for review and approval. Water quality facilities also must be reviewed and approved by the city. Review and comply with provisions of Chapter 4 Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards(Runoff Treatment and Control). Other Comments: Water quality and detention facility design and construction must be certified by a professional engineer as meeting Clean Water Services requirements. After completion of the construction of these facilities, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city on city-furnished forms for long-term maintenance of the facilities. This agreement will be recorded and city staff will be periodically inspecting the facilities for compliance with the terms of the agreement. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT TAX In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic impact Fee (TiF) which was replaced in 2008 by a Transportation Development Tax (TDT) that became effective 7/1/09. The TDT program 11111 collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TDT incorporates the proposed use of the land and the size of the project. The TDT is calculated, due, and payable at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances payment of the TOT may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TDT exceeds the TDT rate for a single-family home. Pay TDT as required. PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from Development Engineering. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in the Permit Center at City Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The PFI permit application shall include any on-site water quality and detention facilities that may be required as part of the land use approval. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: CUY MAU Pre-AaPtkallo®Conference Metes Pape 4'15 NOTE: If an PFi Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any porm is from the Building Dion • Building Division Permits The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BLIP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. • Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. PREPARED BY: Mike Mccarihy DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER 10DATE3�� Phone: 15031718-2462 E-mail: mikent@tigard-or.gov Revised: March 2012 • Neiman:Eaelaeritm tICtUOA Conference Ne1es Page 5.15 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Site Distance Certification • Traffic Analysis • Exhibit B • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 . •'0\ PR Ore, .TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM (a / G OREGON ^ O � LANCASTER TO: Joe Westerman OQ E WO' II4 ENGINEERING FROM: Todd E. Mobley, PE, PTOE 1 321 SW 4^'Ave.,Suite 400 Max Scheideman EXPIRES: .`z,/�,[col Portland,OR97204 phone:503.248.0313 fax:503.248.9251 DATE: April 7, 2014 lancasterergineering.com SUBJECT: Westerman Apartments Traffic Access and Analysis INTRODUCTION A 66-unit multi-family residential development is proposed for a site located on the east side of SW Greenburg Road south of SW Hall Boulevard and north of SW Washington Square Road in Washington County, Oregon. The site is located directly east of Washington Square Mall.The proposed development will take access via one driveway on SW Greenburg Road. Surrounding properties are developed and there are no opportunities for additional access.The development is expected to be completed by 2016. • The purpose of this study is to assess the traffic impact of the proposed development on the nearby street system and to recommend any required mitigation measures. The analysis will include level of service calculations, an evaluation of crash history at the study area access,access spacing,and intersection sight distance analysis. LOCATION DESCRIPTION The subject property is located on the east side of SW Greenburg Road, between SW Hall Boulevard to the north and SW Washington Square Mall Road to the south. The site is bordered by Washington Square Mall to the west, by single-family residential development to the east,by multi-family residential and commercial uses to the north, and by commercial and sing-family residential developments to the south. The proposed development will take access via one driveway on SW Greenberg Road. The driveway will serve only the proposed development. This study includes a detailed operational analysis for the intersection of the driveway access at SW Greenburg Road. SW Greenburg Road operates under the jurisdiction of Washington County in the City of Tigard and is classified as an Arterial Street. It has a three-lane cross section with one lane in each direction and a two-way left turn lane in the center. Curbs are in place along both sides of the roadway. Sidewalk facilities are located on the east side of the roadway. On-street parking is not available on both sides of the roadway. The roadway has a posted speed of 35 mph. TriMet offers bus service to the site vicinity via Route 76,Beaverton/Tualatin,which offers service weekdays from about 6:00 AM to 12:00 AM with headways of 20 minutes to one hour. Saturday • Joe Westerman April 7, 2014 Page 2 of 6 service is from about 6:30 AM to 9:30 PM with headways of 40 minutes to one hour. Sunday service is from 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM with headways of 40 minutes to one hour.The site is also served by Route 78,Beaverton/Lake Oswego,which offers service weekdays from about 5:30 AM to 12:00 AM with headways of 20 minutes to one hour. Saturday service is from about 6:15 AM to 11:00 PM with headways of 40 minutes to one hour. Sunday service is from 7:00 AM to 10:15 PM with headways of 40 minutes to one hour.The Washington Square Transit center is also nearby the site vicinity. TRIP GENERATION To estimate the number of trips that will be generated by the proposed residential development, trip rates from manual TRIP GENERATION, Ninth Edition,published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers,were referenced. The trip rates used were those for land use code 220,Apartment and are based on the number of dwelling units.Trip generation rates were calculated for 67 units as a worst case scenario. The proposed development is projected to result in 34 trips during the morning peak hour,with 7 entering and 27 exiting the site. During the evening peak hour,42 trips are projected, with 27 entering and 15 exiting the site. A weekday total of 446 trips are projected, with half entering and half exiting the site. • The table below summarizes the trip generation data. Detailed trip generation worksheets are also included in the technical appendix. TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY Westerman Apartments AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total 67Apartment Units 7 27 34 27 15 42 TRIP DISTRIBUTION The trip distribution was determined based on existing travel patterns and traffic volumes in the site vicinity.There are major arterial routes and destinations both to the north and south of the site, and traffic volumes on this segment of Greenburg Road are fairly balanced between northbound and southbound.As such,half of the trips are expected to travel north on Greenburg Road towards SW Hall Road while the remaining half is expected to travel south on Greenburg Road towards SW Washington Square Mall Road. • • Joe Westerman April 7,2014 Page 3 of 6 CRASH HISTORY In order to identify any existing safety hazards in the site vicinity, the most recent five years of crash data was examined along the segment of SW Greenburg Road from immediately south of Hall Boulevard to Lehman Street. There was one reported crash at the intersection of SW Greenburg Road and Lehman Street.The collision occurred when a vehicle exiting the cemetery driveway directly west from Lehman Street was struck by a southbound vehicle on SW Greenburg Road.The collision resulted in non- incapacitating injuries to three of the participants. The crash rate was calculated to be 0.05 crashes per million entering vehicles,which is not indicative of a significant safety hazard.No specific hazards that may have contributed to the crash were identified. INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE Intersection sight distance was examined along the site frontage in order to determine where safe and efficient access can be taken to SW Greenburg Road. Intersection sight distance was measured in accordance with Washington County sight distance standards. • The proposed access for this project is located approximately 85 feet south of the site's north property line at SW Greenburg Road. The posted speed along SW Greenburg Road is 35 mph, requiring 350 feet of sight distance in both directions, in accordance with Washington County Code Section 501-8.5.F(4). As required by Code Sections 501-8.5-F(3)(a) and 501-8.5.F(3)(b), the sight distance from the proposed access to Greenburg Road was based on an eye height of 3.5 feet and an object height of 4.25 feet above the road. The driver's eye is assumed to be 10 feet from the near edge of the pavement to the front of the stopped vehicle,(actual measurement is taken 15 feet from the pavement edge). Looking south from the proposed site access, a total of 435 feet of intersection sight distance is available. Sight distance is limited by a crest vertical curve but meets the required sight distance of 350 feet.To the north of the access,sight distance is adequate on SW Greenburg Road for 800 feet to SW Hall Boulevard. Sight distance was based on field observations and measurements performed February 4,2014.No sight distance mitigations are necessary or recommended. EXISTING&BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES Prior to analyzing the impact of the projected site trips from the proposed development,the existing traffic volumes were adjusted to account for background growth that will occur prior to full occupancy within the proposed subdivision. The 66-unit apartment development can reasonably be fully developed and occupied within two years,so the existing traffic volumes were adjusted to account for two years of growth. Based on information provided by City of Tigard staff,a one • • Joe Westerman April 7, 2014 Page 4 of 6 percent per year linear growth rate was applied to the existing traffic volumes in order to account for general growth in within the region. The following figures are included in the attached Technical Appendix: • Figure 1 —Vicinity map, lane configurations, and existing traffic control devices • Figure 2—Existing and 2016 background traffic volumes, site trip distribution, and trip assignment CAPACITY ANALYSIS To determine the level of service at the study intersections,a capacity analysis was conducted. The analysis was conducted according to unsignalized intersection analysis methodologies in the HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL(HCM)published by the Transportation Research Board. Level of service can range from A, which indicates little or no delay,to F, which indicates a significant amount of congestion and delay. Washington County has established level of service designations based on volume-to-capacity ratio,which are used in this report.Level of service E is generally considered the minimum acceptable level for unsignalized intersections. Detailed levels of service descriptions are included in the appendix to this report. The intersection of SW Greenburg at the site driveway is expected to operate at level of service A • during the morning and evening peak hour for year 2016 when the site is fully occupied. Existing and background analysis is not available because the driveway is not constructed and is only expected to serve the studied development. The results of the capacity analysis including the Levels of Service(LOS),delays and volume-to- capacity(v/c)ratios are shown in the following table. Detailed capacity analysis results are included in the appendix to this report. LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C SW Greenburg Road at Driveway Access 2014 Existing Conditions - 2016 Background 2016 Background plus Site Trips A 42 0.46 A 39 0.46 LOS=Level of Service,based on Washington County v/c ratio criteria Delay=Average Delay per Vehicle in Seconds V/C=Volume-to-Capacity Ratio • • Joe Westerman April 7, 2014 Page 5 of 6 ACCESS SPACING The site has limited frontage along SW Greenburg Road and as mentioned previously, there are no other opportunities for access.The proposed site driveway is near the southern property line and is located midway between the intersection of SW Washington Square Drive at SW Greenburg Road and SW Gormartin Lane at SW Greenburg Road. Washington County has jurisdiction of SW Greenburg Road and with its Arterial classification,the access spacing standard is 600 feet. The SW Washington Square Drive and SW Gormartin Lane intersections with SW Greenburg Road are approximately 425 feet apart, measured centerline to centerline.There is no location along the site frontage where a driveway to the site could meet the access spacing standard.The proposed driveway is located in the best position possible to maximize intersection separation.A center two-way left-turn lane is in place on SW Greenburg Road, offering flexibility for left-turning traffic at driveways and intersections. Sight distance is unrestricted between the nearby intersections and the subject driveway,and no operational problems associated with the proposed driveway location are anticipated. PARKING DEMAND The City of Tigard parking code requires 104 spaces for the planned 66-unit multi-family residential • property. Presently,a total of 95 spaces are proposed,which is a reduction of 9 percent.Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.370.020.C.6.a allows a reduction of up to 20 percent,if it can be demonstrated that: i. Use of transit, demand management programs, and/or special characteristics of the customer, client employee or resident population will reduce expected vehicle use and parking space demand for this development, as compared to standards Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)vehicle trip generation rates and minimum city parking requirements; and ii. A reduction in parking will not have an adverse impact on adjacent uses. To address these criteria,an analysis of the parking demand was conducted for the proposed development based on rates in the manual ITE Parking Generation,nearby transit access,the walking access of nearby facilities,and the addition of bike parking to the project site. Per the analysis detailed below,the planned 95 parking spaces are expected to accommodate the demand of the fully-occupied development. • The manual ITE Parking Generation shows that the average peak-period parking demand for apartments is 1.23 spaces per dwelling unit.This average is based on a blend of 1,2,and 3 bedroom units.According to direction in the manual, if the average bedroom per dwelling unit is less than 1.5 the demand will be 92 percent of the average. Using this methodology established in the Parking Generation manual,the proposed site would have a demand of 1.13 spaces per unit,or a total demand of 75 parking spaces. • • Joe Westerman April 7,2014 Page 6 of 6 • The site is well served by transit.As previously mentioned,TriMet offers bus service along SW Greenburg Road near the site vicinity via Route 76 Beaverton/Tualatin and Route 78, Beaverton/Lake Oswego.The Washington Square Transit Center is also one-third mile from the site access,or a five minute walk. • Based on the walking accessibility index rating from Walk Score(walkscore.com),the area has a walk score of about 80, which is deemed "very walkable". This score takes into account the proximity of transit as well as other attractors such as schools,retail,services, and parks. • The development also proposes to add up to 35 bicycle parking stalls, located throughout the property,24 of which will be covered. Given the parking demand data in the manual TIE Parking Generation,combined with abundant transit and bicycle facilities,the proposed development reasonably qualifies for a reduction in required parking. While a reduction of up to 20 percent is allowable,a reduction of only 9 percent is proposed. Based on this parking analysis,it is recommended that the proposed reduction be allowed. CONCLUSION • As shown in this traffic analysis,the transportation system is capable of accommodating the proposed residential development.The site access is projected to operate acceptably through the year 2016 with the addition of site trips from the proposed development.There is no need for an additional access to serve the site as the single point of access will operate acceptably.No operational or capacity mitigations are necessary or recommended. • • TECHNICAL APPENDIX • • • LEVEL OF SERVICE Level of service is used to describe the quality of traffic flow. Levels of service A to C are considered good, and rural roads are usually designed for level of service C. Urban streets and signalized intersections are typically designed for level of service D. Level of service E is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. For unsignalized intersections, level of service E is generally considered acceptable. Here is a more complete description of levels of service: Level of service A: Very low delay at intersections, with all traffic signal cycles clearing and no vehicles waiting through more than one signal cycle. On highways, low volume and high speeds, with speeds not restricted by other vehicles. Level of service B: Operating speeds beginning to be affected by other traffic; short traffic delays at intersections. Higher average intersection delay than for level of service A resulting from more vehicles stopping. Level of service C: Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other traffic; higher delays at intersections than for level of service B due to a significant number of vehicles stopping. Not all signal cycles clear the waiting vehicles. This is the • recommended design standard for rural highways. Level of service D: Tolerable operating speeds; long traffic delays occur at in- tersections. The influence of congestion is noticeable. At traffic signals many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. The number of signal cycle failures, for which vehicles must wait through more than one signal cycle, are noticeable. This is typically the design level for urban signalized intersections. Level of service E: Restricted speeds, very long traffic delays at traffic signals, and traffic volumes near capacity. Flow is unstable so that any interruption, no matter how minor, will cause queues to form and service to deteriorate to level of service F. Traffic signal cycle failures are frequent occurrences. For unsignalized intersections, level of service E or better is generally considered acceptable. Level of service F: Extreme delays, resulting in long queues which may interfere with other traffic movements. There may be stoppages of long duration, and speeds may drop to zero. There may be frequent signal cycle failures. Level of service F will typically result when vehicle arrival rates are greater than capacity. It is considered unacceptable by most drivers. III APPENDIX PAGE 1 of 8 • C/ LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE V/C RATIO A <0.60 B 0.61 -0.70 C 0.71 -0.80 D 0.81 -0.90 E 0.91 -0.99 F >1.0 >F >1.1 • LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE V/C RATIO A <0.60 B 0.61 -0.70 C 0.71 -0.80 D 0.81 -0.90 E 0.91 -0.99 F >1.0 >F >1.1 • APPENDIX PAGE 2 of 8 Order No. 977D "' County Washington City Tigard Date..'N1X.la. 1994 SPEED ZONE ORDER BY DELEGATED AUTHORITY • Whereas. the Oregon Department of Transportation, Traffic Engineer, as requested by Washington County, pursuant to the provisions of ORS 810.180, has caused an engineering and traffic investigation to be made for the section(s) of state highway, county highway, city highway, or highway under the jurisdiction of a federal agency described below (highway means public way); and Whereas, the data, facts, and information obtained in connection with said engineering and traffic investigation are on file in the office of the Traffic Engineering Section of the Oregon Department of Transportation in Salem, Oregon; and Whereas, based upon said engineering and traffic investigations, the Traffic Engineer has found that the speed designated in ORS 811.105 is greater than is reasonable under the conditions found to exist upon the section(s) of highway for which a lesser speed is herein designated or that the speed designated in said statute is less than is reasonable under the conditions found to exist upon the section(s) of highway for which is a greater speed is herein designated; and Whereas, the provisions of ORS 810.180 respecting notice and hearing have been complied with: It is Therefore Ordered that the designated speed for the following section(s) of highway be as follows: Name SW Greenburg Road Number Route Number LOCATION OF TERMINI From To ' Designated Speed (Miles Per Hour) Beaverton-Tualatin Highway No. 141 Pacific Highway West No. 1W 35 mph 2/ • 2/ County road within city limits This rescinds Order No. 463D, dated October 1, 1987. ++«.++**** **************** ***** *****************.+++AA ALA***+****++++++, *** *****,t*******yr++A.++++,F******+ Be it further ordered that Washington County install appropriate signs (agency responsible for signing) on the above section(s) of highway, giving notice of the designated speed therefore. Be it further ordered that signs installed pursuant to this order comply with the provisions of ORS 810.210 and 810.220. Be it further ordered that any previous order made by the Department with respect to the designated speed for the above section(s) of highway which is in conflict with the provisions of this order is hereby rescinded. Be it further ordered that the Traffic Engineer of the Oregon Department of Transportation is hereby illdelegated the authority to sign this order for and on behalf of the Department. APPENDIX PAGE 3 of 8 (Traffic Engineer) • • 1111/ CDS380 OREGON.. DEPARTMENT OP TRANSPORTATION - TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT DIVISION Page. it 03/10/2014 TRANSPORTATION DATA SECTION - CRASH ANAYLY5I3 AND REPORTING UNIT UPHAN NON-SYSTEM CRASH LOOTING CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY 01116NBDR0 RD and Ioteeaecttonal Ceaanes et ORER11RVRO ID, City at Tigard, Washington County. 01/01/2004 to 12/31/2012 Total crash records: 21D S D P REN INT-TYPE RPM.USE RAUCO DATE CLASS CITY STREET RD CHAR (NRDIANI INT-EEL OFPRD STOLE CRASH MLR OTY MOVE A S BEER R L O H I DAY DIET FIRST STREET DIRECT LEGS TRAP- RNCET SURF CULL OWNER FROM PRTC INS 0 6 LICKS PED INVPRT DCA L E TTALF PAne nnMNn n7REBT IJICTN (4LANE91 0nm-rt, INIVNY LIGHT RVRTY VR TYPE TO D5_7YPe SVRTY E R RFC IOC ERROR ACT "VENT CAUSE TP 06 N DAY INS MIRCYCLE 01 DRVR INJB 55 N OR-Y 0D0 080 26 (031 0R425 00620 N N N 02/01/2011 16 SW OR21NBUR0 RD ALLEY N N CLR AN0L-0TX 01 NONE 0 STROHT 02 NO ROT TN 22B 97/LEHMAN ST N (NON81 UNRNONN N DRY TURN PRVTE N -3 000 0D 2P 08 N DAY INS PSNGR CAR 01 DRVR INil 36 F OR-Y 000 000 00 (02) OR<25 01 NONE 0 STROHT PRVTE N -S 000 00 001001 CAR 02 PSNS INSB OB F 00D 000 00 01 NONE 0 STROHT PRVTE N -S 000 00 PSNGR CAR 01 POND INJB 08 M 000 000 00 02 3005 0 TURN-L PRVTE N -N 016 0D SENOR CAR 01 DRVR NONE 62 ■ OR-Y 020 000 02 -___�_—_— — OR<25 03117 N N N 07/10/2000 16 5N OREENBURO RD MYRA 3-LEG N N CIA 0-1TURN 01 UN101 9 SPRINT 04 NONE BA 0 8N LOCUST ST CH TOP SIGNAL N DRY TURN PRVTE 0 -N 000 00 3P 04 0 N DAY P00 PSNGR CAR D1 DRVR NONE 00 M OR-Y 090 000 00 0R<25 02 NONE 0 TURN-L PRVTE N -E 000 00 PSNGR CAR 01 DOVE NONE 19 F OR-Y 097 000 00 _ 01125 _ 0216E N N N N N 04/2T/2011 16 SW 0R000101G R➢ INFER 3-L40 N N CLD ANOL-OTH 01 NONE 0 SPRINT 04 CITY NE 0 SW LOCUST ST CN TRF SIGNAL N DRY TURN PRVTE S -N 000 00 9P 02 0 N DLIT ROO PSNGR CAR Cl DRVR NONE 21 F OR-Y 020 000 04 OR<26 02 NONE 0 TURN-L PRVTE a -S 000 00 PBNOR CAR 01 DOVE NONE 65 M OR-Y 000 000 00 _ 011421 0264T N N N 07/24/2009 16 SW GREENBERG R➢`_ ALLEY N N CLR S-OTHER D1 U21101 9 TURN-L i--- OS NONE FR 150 6N LOCUST ST 6 (NONEI TOP SIGNAL N DRY TURN PRVTE S -N 019 00 2P 07 N DAY POO PSNGR CAR 01 DRVR NONE 32 N OTH-Y 007 000 00 (04) UNA 02 NONE 0 TURN-1 PRVTE 8 -W 000 00 PROGR CAR 01 DRVR NONE 17 F OR-Y 000 000 OD OR425_ O2L5T N N N 06/06/2009 16 SW OREINEURO RD ALLOY N N UNR 5.1TOPN 01 I1t2101 1 STRGNT --- 07 NON! FR 374 SW LOCUST ST S (NONE) TRP STONAL N UHR TURN PRVTE S -N 000 00 11A 08 N DAY P00 PSNOR CAR DI DOVE NONE DO M OR-Y 042 000 07 (04) ORd5 02 NONE 0 TORN-L PRVTE S -N 019 00 PSNGR CM 01 DOVE NONE RD F OR-Y 000 0D0 DO _ GR42S _ 06153 N N N 11/D6/2000 16 RN ORRONBURO RD ALLEY N N RAIN 6-OTHER 01 0R10h 9 TURN-It �� _- -_` 09 I�/s4'fRpPpmR�T�9fReM0-MeSPBMIdkAb repp0 I.com1RW from Indlvldval ddver andpollee mash reports sudm8rod ro IM Oregon DepMmeM o/Tnnapodatlan IS required In 00$811.M0.me Cnth Anslyels CS RepoMin5 Unit is mmmined to Wnvidin0 the hlgOes)quRllly 0110 dais to coafomers.however,Aeceose scOm1Rel o/cnsh repast bona la ,A�A BRASS has b edv1�1 le for Inclusion In the SteM1Nde Oneh Dale Fit. LEGEND • STUDY INTERSECTION Paa • L-IPROJECT SITE O\e5o Sg H„R 0 o- o` Q 0 0 0 a SW Gormartin Loa _ \ r � • ♦ o •• ♦ c ton Square Mall Road (A) ♦♦ '. Washing ♦♦ PROJECT SITE g ♦Le- 0 • D 0 pTp b 1 p SW Lehman Street 4 SW Coral Street Washington Square Mall Road (B) VICINITY MAP FIGURE Site Access and Nearby Intersections *re PAGE •t stir time Configurations and Traffic Control Devices „ LEGEND • STUDY INTERSECTION � d R • L.J PROJECT SITE a S' `glY 74:r R 0,7a 0 a 0- 0 0 n 0 0 0 SW Gormartin Lane St 111 D O r • N N I , ` y,, a \\ \ S. h oaa ton Square Mall Road (A) ♦. ";t Washington \♦ PROJECT SITE : a • IA _._ o ,17 / ` �17 `, �4 .V18 4- �y .F18 AM T Try T T AM ^ O M q) Lp r�j Lrl frt rs h ` fO II t 8 NII N'r,`` 8 PM W 7 7 W ) PMPM T Try 1 2 ___ " _ \\\--- 7:-'//// Existing Site Trips Background Year Background Year Washington Square Mall Road (8) 2016 2016 plus Site iiirTRAFFIC VOLUMES, SITE TRIP DISTRIBUTION, AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT FIGURE2014 Existing, 2016 Background, 2016 Background plus Site i* mil.- DIM/cod DIM/cod Pitt teak Hours no scale PAAGE HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Westerman Apartments Access 1: Driveway Access & SW Greenburg Road Year 2016 Background Conditions - AM Peak Flour k- t , t l y .1,".;.: T a::'s, v ems_ k Ft.z..✓:'.'._ t' �'•. ''t 14r4�x„,n' +�•r'.l '"�.ai.'a -:'J. Lane Configurations r jr + Sign'Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 18 17 578 3 4 612 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 Hourly flow rate(vph) 23 22 741 4 5 785 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 1536 741 745 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf r„'aF.+Yr�l:...�. .• _. 1k�,�..t.es n .^, :w , .,.: .r .. �.i�<�Z vCu, unblocked vol 1536 741 745 tC,single(s) 6.5 6.3 <'• . .;4.2 � °x r tC, 2 stage (s) tF s} '. R'3.6 3.4 2.3 ��'i �, t < _ �:1A5f p0 queue free . 81 95 99 ' cM c"apacity(veh/h) 120 399 g�g 832 * . ° 'wogiffilik• O`tUr Total ' 23 22 741. 4 5 785 ter Volume Left ..23 0 0 0 5 0 Volume Rig ht „am: '0 22 0 4 0 0 ,,.t.A " ,2 „" 'p cSH 120 399 1700 1700 832 1700 Volume to Capacity ` 0.19 0.05 0.44 0.00 0.01 0.46 fkl Queue Length 95th (ft) 17 4 0 0 0 0 Control Delay(s) 42.1 14.6 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 Lane LOS E B A Approach Delay(s) 28.7 0.0 0.1 :< A ,> ks, '��x Approach LOS p ova Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.2%ap Y ICU Level of Service A s` Analysis Period (min) 15 3/13/2014 Synchro 6 Light Report • Lancaster Engineering Page 1 APPENDIX PAGE 7 of 8 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Westerman Apartments Access 1: Driveway Access & SW Greenburg ROa'i ar 2016 Background Conditions plus Project - PM Peak Hour -' t ..,. : _ _...: Lane Configurations ►� r + 1 + ` ntrol Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 7 8 612- 14 13 578 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 10 785 18 17 741 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 1559 785 803 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1559 785 803 tC,single (s) 6.5 6.3 ,w. 4.2 tRi.ei"t , tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.6 3.4 2.3 p0 queue free % 92 97 98 cm capacity veh/h 114 376 791 ""' Ag 7P • iz '� ,i-,y� ..y�nr Y,:r,"`s "'64)t`f 'n/ e 1 ,a...n' '& 6,..e'L.y,F v' R �¢y.�a #isay„ t Volume Total , , 9 10 785 18 17 741 J_ fi Volume Left 9 0 0 0 17 0 V'_otilne Right 0 10 _ 0 18 0 D ry 3 ;, cSH 114 376 1700 1700 791 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.03 0.46 0.01 0.02 0.44 a Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 2 0 0 2 0 Control Delay(s) 39.2 14.8 0.0 0.0 9.6 0.0 Lane LOS E B A Approach Delay(s) 26.2 0.0 0.2 ' -g-sk , l fEK li:ger ,.`, Approach LOS D Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.2% >-4x=ICU Level of Service tt'� ,' �. , Analysis Period (min) 15 3/13/2014 Synchro 6 Light Report IDLancaster Engineering Page 1 APPENDIX PAGE 8 of 8 lk, EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Preliminary Storm Calculations See Storm Drain Plan Sheet 4 • • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 lkEVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Arborist Report See Plan Sheets L1 — L4 for Arborist Report See attached Urban Forestry Plan Supplemental Report • • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 I. WESTERN GROUP An ■ ARCHITECTURE V INTERIOR DESIGN • PLANNING V LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • _Soo L;,a yid Lori 5o"e. ;io ' V.,"cou,...11'A paoe, Fibre +co-o9?-ss17 . la..Soo-ou.-;"is cell 3n0-c21 } URBAN FORESTRY PLAN - SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Date: August 18,2014 ����� Project Greenburg Road Apartments • 653 • Project Landscape Architect: James A.Clark "i James A. Clark [—+ 2300East Loop, Suite 100 0 Vancouver,WA 98661 %a> 01/31/08 360-921-4445 jclark@westerndesigngroup.net Registration#LA-653 Tree Preservation and Removal This site does not contain existing trees,so no tree protection or removal is proposed on the site.There are existing trees on adjoining properties. There is an existing 5'chain-link fence on the north property line. This fence will serve as tree protection for off-site trees adjacent to this boundary. Prior to construction, a 5'metal chain-link fence will be installed on all perimeter property lines. This will serve as tree protection fencing for all • off-site trees. No other supplemental specifications are proposed for this project. No growth limiting soils have been observed on the site. Ooen Grown Trees Proposed for Planting # Name Size Spread Canopy Soil Volume Comments 001 Acer griseum/Paperbark Maple 3.5"cal 25' 491 s.f. Over 400 c.f. Street Tree 002 Acer griseum/Paperbark Maple 3.5"cal 25' 491 s.f. Over 400 c.f. Street Tree 003 Acer griseum/Paperbark Maple 3.5"cal 25' 491 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 004 Populus tremuloides 1 Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 005 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 006 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 007 Populus tremuloides/ Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 008 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 009 Populus tremuloides 1 Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 010 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal IS' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 011 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 012 Populus tremuloides 1 Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 013 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal IS' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 014 Populus tremuloides 1 Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 015 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 016 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 017 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 018 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 019 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree • 020 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree Page I of 3 021 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 022 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree • 023 Zelkova serrate I Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 024 Zelkova serrate I Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 025 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 026 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 027 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 028 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 029 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 030 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal IS' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 031 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen I.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 032 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen I.5"cal 15' ' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 033 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 034 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 035 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 036 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 037 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 038 Psuedotsuga menziesii I Douglas Fir 6' 40' 1256 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 039 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen I.5"cal IS' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 040 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 041 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen I.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 042 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen I.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 043 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 044 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 045 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 046 Acer griseum/Paperbark Maple 3.5"cal 25' 491 s.f. Over 400 c.f. Street Tree • 047 Zelkova serrota/Zelkova I.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 048 Zelkova serrota/Zelkova I.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 049 Zelkova serrota/Zelkova I.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 050 Zelkova serrota/Zelkova I.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 05 I Zelkova serrate/Zelkova I.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 052 Zelkova serrota/Zelkova I.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 053 Zelkova serrate I Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 054 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 055 Zelkova serrate I Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 056 Zelkova serrate I Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 057 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 058 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1 000 c.f. Parking Tree Tree Stands Proposed for Planting No tree stands are proposed with this project. Effective Tree Canopy Cover for Overall Development Site Site Area: 68,481 s.f. Total Tree Canopy Area: 46,440 s.f %Canopy Coverage: 68%(33%minimum) • Page 2 of 3 To the best of my knowledge... • I. The tree preservation and removal plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part I of the Urban Forestry Manual; 2. The canopy site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual; and 3. The supplemental report meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. 6/8/14 James A. Clark Date • • Page 3 of 3 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Existing Conditions Map • • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd.,Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 • •• y..... .J.. . L r ,I1I. 44. el."1V.•••**44,1!-'• 4 w'k4 1. '.et•,r .F i i' { & w Y. y �3 r '`4 x a '_ P [ � ,4 14 •r a 't '•r h"' �1 h •�v'� a _ -...�� �. 'P't '>.. -.A-I V. i ter' <} •i , • It # , �,._ -tFt> ' ..+,^v ' t:, y y l t A• -_ w 1. r ,• _fh`„a, r t yam+ -, ti E 1 J YIi 1,. _ 5, • 1 }•! e`C•ny,d ,.`:: "P?^.-"- i -t la G.-' kF 1 JI,°•f' ly .4` y J� ' 41 '4S;a"•; r .+:yr r',?;`Y"^ °\'.,, > '.y'."k,"'S"'15y:fk�,. [_.t.' I C ti I 4A@ xM iAKJ'�w r 14Zr 14 F ,d"Ti 2 r.\'4 ' iy a., 1 d � • ry-. ~ '_ ryx" r r . �•Yr`+S' +w F'x. r u��y 1 1 l�. y,�y�� 1 ^ S t , •�„3 • - a 5 \. ' a�M,- t1.. w.M 4,2<,,'�•ay�1 }�t xS.}� ry. ? t• 7�iT. v^;V - t s : 2 LrF - ,... E3' �+aa� .y_ t.�7 4 'J kti v f . , `►�ya�yy_',' ' � lj! gh : D M do Y�vi _ . x �s5` Q+"r { fit 1 w i f I; f ��� ,, exo, !• D/� . �k Yi y 4x,f�lkT y 2 F t 'S? iMa'd� ' yy, SRp I. ;4 4,, e Af y, - IK'.JVr4 r.'"I" (. 'd t MY k` fiLa{�, {, + , rip a# _' yi�i'.}• d,} _S+ ;{' t P,Iti!' wi.. .� 411 Y jy1.+ .. 1 r. • .41y1 ➢ Y-4+k1 is "6+ F.. • t2l �1 r1JPYY4 ' } it�«t Yq�g •3 e• . r . r 0 '•d sw�++ ! 2,17 ecW4y "r 46 a� rir� t isa of a p� r 0 la '^"fin: ti gyp,"��':t:` 1"T�, Gi`r�.1. p,r •Y•G 3l, y 'y 1i ,�'�j..f �} a '//�� .,,.5 • p y rayti7 «x' abl 1' add •�`{fl�'T 5"a,' M{vr rV J y =r \Ga.'s,'$��,f�5' , esY�'ka•l,.r" 1 rrr ,C„,1•aM 'F, q�y lj{!,y ''f 4.i 1 Y'. �l ' f3+V F r•)1 T'"`e,.,r4,"!41 ' .r 4 -.; ak 4..' ' '' d' r � t!`' �„� F�'{i.9 {H,Jv • e ^41� �' ft nl•'�"- y `1.:::4;;-': CD y } y' ir..�, .{,. +�".•-f `"j'[ . •r• ;�,fj; F ; •r - v r t.'Yfr'.`d - \ • _I - `¢ e $v d 1 y e•• i4,' • �i r,d. y 1 {• 1., in K . . tru d '. wA'.m1 44 R i-°I.°.S1i "4"• y,� '' —•• 'T..b v— m• ,.,,d R 6 [ `ISTS .'1'.i f Csr Ii qy' _ 4..4 a ,''.«••krl tr•-•'"'n2%=_ tif. ?u9 x fl 3 . .a, I,h 1. ` ;', .,a i • 11- I ry f — 1' _ .y.r • dF I('t ,li 1� i.e.—al (; I s� f• ,r�r. F :le a_i �' , am l rf { I M „b • � � 4 1-y c 1. J'.... . 4_.. EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • • Plans Exhibit A 1. Architectural Drawings sheets 8-13 2. Landscape Plans/Arborist Report sheets L1-L4 • 3. Erosion Control sheet 2 4. Preliminary Grading sheet 3 5. Preliminary Storm sheet 4 6. Preliminary Utilities sheet 5 7. Public Improvements sheet 6 8. Site Development Plan sheet 1 9. Topography Plan sheet 7 10. Vicinity Map sheet 1 • 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • Arborist Report See Plan Sheets L1 — L4 for Arborist Report See attached Urban Forestry Plan Supplemental Report 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 WESTER ARC NI rrC.;TURr V INTERIOR DESIGN PLANNING ♦ LANDSCAPE APCHITECTUPE 2300 E45t3r.J Loop,Sate 110 E Vancouver,WA 98661 ehonc)60695-5517 E fax 560-6?4-7515 4 cd1560-921-1945 URBAN FORESTRY PLAN - SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Date: June 8, 2014 r T Project: Greenburg Road Apartments A7 4,6 • 653 • Project Landscape Architect: James A. Clark r-+ James A. Clark [� 2300 East 3rd Loop,Suite 100 OREGON U Vancouver,WA 98661 01/31/08 360-921-4445 tf'�y jclark@westerndesigngroup.net 4pE AA Registration#LA-653 Tree Preservation and Removal This site does not contain existing trees, so this section does not apply to the project. Open Grown Trees Proposed for Planting # Name Size Spread Canopy Soil Volume Comments 001 Acer griseum/Paperbark Maple 3.5"cal 25' 491 s.f. 543 c.f. Street Tree 002 Acer griseum I Paperbark Maple 3.5"cal 25' 491 s.f. 543 c.f. Street Tree 003 Acer griseum I Paperbark Maple 3.5"cal 25' 491 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 004 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 005 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 006 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 007 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 008 Populus tremuloides /Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 009 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 010 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 011 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 012 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 013 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 014 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 015 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 016 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 017 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 018 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 019 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 020 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 021 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 022 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 023 Zelkova serrata/Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 024 Zelkova serrata/Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree Page I of 3 025 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova I.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 026 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova I.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 027 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova I.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 028 Populus tremuloides 1 Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 029 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 030 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 03 I Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal IS' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 032 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 033 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 034 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 035 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 036 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 037 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 038 Psuedotsuga menziesii/Douglas Fir 6' 40' 1256 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 039 Psuedotsuga menziesii/Douglas Fir 6' 40' 1256 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 040 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 041 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 042 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 043 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 044 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 045 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 046 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 047 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 048 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova I.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 049 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova I.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 050 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova I.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 051 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 052 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 053 Zelkova serrate 1 Zelkova I.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 054 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova I.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 055 Zelkova serrate 1 Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 056 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 057 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5"cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 058 Zelkova serrate/ Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 059 Acer griseum 1 Paperbark Maple 3.5" cal 25' 491 s.f. 543 c.f. Street Tree Tree Stands Proposed for Planting No tree stands are proposed with this project. Effective Tree Canopy Cover for Overall Development Site Site Area: 68,481 s.f. Total Tree Canopy Area: 46,440 s.f % Canopy Coverage: 68%(33%minimum) Page 2 of 3 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • ExistingConditions Map 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC • Plans Exhibit A 1. Architectural Drawings sheets 8-13 2. Landscape Plans/Arborist Report sheets L1-L4 3. Erosion Control sheet 2 4. Preliminary Grading sheet 3 5. Preliminary Storm sheet 4 6. Preliminary Utilities sheet 5 7. Public Improvements sheet 6 8. Site Development Plan sheet 1 9. Topography Plan sheet 7 10. Vicinity Map sheet 1 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 CITY OF TIGARD PRE:APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES (Pre Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) IfIGARD PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: 1u44k ? 1004 STAFF AT PRE-APP.: ` )T. RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: Joe Westerman AGENT: Phone: 503-313-4621 Phone: PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: 9550 SW Greenburg Road _ TAX MAP(S)/LOT#(S): 15126 DC00900 NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: Site Development Review,parking adjustment i(l rer- S a!U. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 5, three story multi-family buildings (60-70 units), 20 garage spaces. 60 parking spaces. 0 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: MUE-1 ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: MUE-1 ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.510) MINIMUM LOT SIZE: NONE sq. ft.Average Min.lot width: NONE ft. Max.bldg height: 200 ft. (2 stories min.I MAX.SITE COVERAGE:85% (all bldgs.&imperv. surfaces) Min landscaped or natural vegetation area: 1 /o. Setbacks: Front: 0 ft(Max. 20 ft). Side:0** ft Rear:0** ft Corner. Oft(Max.20 ft). from street. Garages: 20 ft Min. Res. Density: 50units/acre **Side&rear yard setbacks shall be 20'when zone abuts residential districts. ® NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the.Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 PEET, INTERESTED PARTIES, • 10 THE CITY OF TIGA II ING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8 Residential.1pplitanon;PlannmR Division Section ® NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Chapter 18.390) The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A,NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. 1 IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050) As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE AN IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address,at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. I ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.765) Minimum number of accesses:2 Minimum access width:_3.afeet. Minimum pavement width: 24 feet& 5 foot walkway required. ®WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.705) Within all ATTACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling SHALL BE CONNECTED BY WALKWAY TO THE VEHICULAR PARKING AREA,COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES. Ej RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION (Refer to Code Chapter 18.715)—See example below. The NET RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOWED on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the net area of the developable land by the minimum number of square feet required per dwelling unit as specified by the applicable zoning designation. Net development area is calculated by subtracting the following land area(s) from the total site area: All sensitive lands areas including: > Land within the 100-year floodplain; ➢ Slopes exceeding 25%; Drainageways;and Wetlands for the R-1,R-2,R-3.5, R-4.5 and R-7 zoning districts. Public right-of-way dedication: > Single-family allocate 20%of gross acres for public facilities;or > Multi-family allocate 15%of gross acres for public facilities;or ➢ If available, the actual public facility square footage can be used for deduction. All land proposed for private Streets SEE NOTES FOR ESTIMATED DENSITY CALCULATIONS. EXAMPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS: EXAMPLE: USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE (3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE)WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS Single-Family Multi-Family 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 8.712 sq. ft. (20%) for public ri ht-of-wa 43,560 sq. ft. 1 gross site area NET: 34,848 square feet g y sq ft (15% for public right of wary 05 I (minimum t NET: 37,026 square feet ; 11.4 limits Per Acre (maximum) = 3-OSn rr um lot ar a1 12.1 Lints Per Acre (maximum) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 • The Development Code requires that the net site area exist for the next whole dwelling unit. NO ROUNDING UP IS PERMITTED. • Minimum Project Density is 80% of the maximum allowed density. TO DETERMINE, MULTIPLY THE MAXIMUM BY.8. El SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to.Code Section 18.730) 1' STREETS' feet from the centerline of FLAG LOT: A TEN (10)-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK applies to all primary structures. S' ZERO LOT LINE LOTS: A minimum of a ten (10)-foot separation shall be maintained between. each dwelling unit or garage. y' MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL building separation standards apply within multiple-family residential developments. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES UP TO 528 SQUARE FEET in size may be permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in size. Five (5)-foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UP TO 1,000 SQUARE FEET on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size. (See applicable zoning district for the primary structures'setback requirements.] ❑ FLAG LOT BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 11/2 STORIES or 25 feet,whichever is less in most zones;21/2 stories,or 35 feet in R-7,R-12,R-25 or R-40 zones provided that the standards of Section 18.730.010.C.2 are satisfied. ® BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.745) In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the CITY REQUIRES LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREAS along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these arc often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. The ESTIMA FED REQUIRED BUFFERS applicable to your proposal area is: Buffer Level TYPE C (A-along north boundary. Buffer Level TYPE C along east boundary. Buffer Level TYPE C 14iS, along south boundary. Buffer Level TYPE A along west boundary. SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: NORTH,SOUTH&EAST. ® STREET TREES&PARKING LOT TREES (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745 and 18.765) STREET TREES SHALL BE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE (TYPE Ill), DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW PARTITION (TYPE II), PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (TYPE III), SITE DEVELOPM MINOR ENT T REVIEW (TYPE II), AND SUBDIVISION (TYPE II & III). The minimum number of required street trees shall be determined by dividing the linear amount of street frontage within,or adjacent to the site (in feet) by 40 feet (if the number is a fraction,round to the nearest whole number). The trees shall be placed within the public right-of-way whenever possible but no more than six (6) feet from the right-of-way boundary. Street trees shall be planted according to Section 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual and adequate soil volumes shall be provided in accordance with Section 12 of the Urban Forestry Manual. Existing trees may be used to meet the street standards. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. PARKING LOT TREES ARE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR A DEVELOPMENTCEVDITIONAL USE (TYPE III), DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW (TYPE II & III), PLANNED (TYPE III),AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(TYPE II).All parking areas,including parking spaces and aisles,shall be required to achieve at least 30% tree canopy cover at maturity directly above the CITY OF TIGARD Pre-.Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8 Residential Applicatton/Planning nicixe n Section parking area in accordance with Section 13 of the Urban Forestry Manual. ® RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Pride Disposal can be reached at(503) 625-6177. PARKING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.765 & 18.705) ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED. Single-family Requires: One (1) off-street parking space per dwelling unit;and One (1) space per unit less than 500 square feet. +' Multiple-family Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom; 1.5 spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms;and 1.75 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms. 32 1-bed. Units:40 spaces 28 2 bed.Units: 42 spaces TOTAL:82 spaces + 13 (guest parking) = 95 spaces Multi-family dwelling units with more than ten (10) required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall consist of 15% of the-total required parking. NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. Parking stalls shall be dimensioned as follows: Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet. 6 inches X 18 feet, 6 inches. Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet. 6 inches X 16 feet,6 inches. handicapped parking: All parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabled person parking spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. ® BICYCLE RACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.765) BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. 1.0 space/2 units = 30 spaces required for 60 units ❑ SENSITIVE LANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.775) The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCFSS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-application conference based on available information. HOWEVER areas and their boundaries is the res oasibili � ,Elie resoonsibiiity to recisely identify sensitive land lands must be clear] indicated onplans submitted with thedevelo malt a mli non a definitions of sensitive Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTI_AL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED ITIUN FLOODPLAINS SOME RESIDENTIAL RELATED DEVELOPMENT IS EXEMPT. ❑ STEEP SLOPES (Refer to Code Section 18.775.070.C) When STEEP SLOPES exist,prior to issuance of a final order,a geotechnical report must be submitted which CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. CLEANWATER SERVICES(CWS)Service Provider Letter PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the CWS R&O 07-20 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. ® SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively,a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. ® URBAN FORESTRY PLAN(Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.0 and the "Tree Canopy Requirements" Brochure) AN URBAN FORESTRY PLAN IS REQUIRED FOR THE FOLLWING TYPES OF DEVFI OPMENT: Conditional Use(Type III);Downtown Design Review(Type II and III);Minor Land Partition(Type II); Planned Development(Type III);Sensitive Lands Review (Type II and III);Site Development Review(Type II); and Subdivision (Type II and III). The plan needs to be prepared by an ISA certified arborist or landscaped architect. Percentage of mature canopy cover require& 33% (Refer to Appendix 2-6 in Urban Forerby'Manual for a Trst of trees with mature Canopy corer areas) Percentage of mature canopy cover required per lot in the R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5 da K-7 zones: 15% An urban.forestry plan shall: - Be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect (the project landscape architect) or a person possessing dual certifications as a certified arborist and certified tree risk assessor(the project arborist); - Meet the tree preservation and removal site plan standards in Section 10, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual; - Meet the tree canopy site plan standards in Section 10,part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual;and - Meet the supplemental report standards in Section 10,part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. TREE CANOPY FEE. If the effective percentage of tree canopy cover cannot be met, the applicant shall provide the city a tree canopy fee according to the methodology outlined in Section 10, part 4 of the Urban Forestry Manual. 18.790.040-Discretionary Urban Forestry Plan Review Option In lieu of providing payment of a tree canopy fee when less than the standard effective tree canopy cover required by Section 10, part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual will be provided, an applicant may apply for a discretionary urban forestry plan review. The discretionary urban forestry plan review cannot be used to modify an already approved urban forestry plan, any tree preservation or tree planting requirements established as part of another land use review approval, or any tree preservation or tree planting requirements required by another chapter in this tide. ® PRESERVATION OF EXISTING TREES (Refer to Code Section 18.790.050.C.) To assist in the preservation and/or planting of trees and significant tree groves, the director may apply one or more of the following flexible standards as part of the land use review approval. Use of the flexible standards shall be requested by the project arborist or landscape architect as part of the land use review process. The flexible standards are only applicable to trees that ate eligible for credit towards the effective tree canopy cover of the site. CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes kennal Applicanonn fanning Division Section Page 5 of 8 o,d Appropriate species of trees in good condition and suitable for preservation receive a 200 percent credit based on their existing canopy area. Refer to Section II-.Part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual for submittal requirements. ® CLEAR VISION AREA (Refer to Code Chapter 18.795) The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway,_road/railroad, and toad/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. The applicant shall show the clear vision areas on the site plan, and identify any obstructions in these areas. ❑ FUTURE STREET PLAN AND EXTENSION OF STREETS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.030.F.) A FUTURE STREET PLAN shall: Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 530 feet surrounding and adjacent to the proposed land division. Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 530 feet of the site. Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed. ❑ ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.060) MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 21/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. ❑ BLOCKS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.040) The perimeter of BLOCKS FORMED.BY STREETS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2,000 FEET measured along the right-of-way center line except where street location is precluded by natural topography,wetlands or other bodies of water or,pre-existing development. When block lengths greater than 330 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. CODE CHAPTERS ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design (N Standards) 0 1R.76 (Nonconforming Situations) ❑ 18.340(Director's Interpretation) ® 18.630(Washington Square Regional El 18.765 (Off-Street Parking/Loading Center Requirements) 0 18.350(Planned Development) q 0 18.640(Durham Quarry Design ❑ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) Standards) ® 18.360(Site Development Review) ® 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) ® 18.780(Signs) 0 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) 0 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) ( )0 18.380(Zoning Map/Text 0 18.790(Temporary y Use Permits)n) Amendments) 18.715(Density Computations) 18.790(Urban Forestry Plan) ❑ 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) 0 18.720(Design Compatibility eiI 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) Standards) ® 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact(D ion Study) ® 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) ❑ 18.798 (Wireless Communication ❑ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) Facilities) 0 18.730(Exceptions To Development El 18.810 (Street Sr Utility Improvement Standards) ❑ 18.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay) Standards) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 ❑ 18.430(Subdivisions) 0 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) ❑ 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) E2 18.745 dsca in �' P g&Screening Standards) 21 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) 0 18.750 (Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) IZ 18.755,(Ialixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: Provide a narrative that states facts to show how the criteria are met. Referring to the plan does not meet the criterion. Narratives that do not rovide facts are considered incom lete and will rolon the review rocess. The site is located within the Washington Square Regional Center; therefore the development must meet the Washington Square design standards. The front yard for most western units must be along Greenburg Road. These units must be oriented to Greenburg Road, have connections to Greenburg Road, and meet windows/articulation/variable building materials/landscaping requirements. Estimated Density Calculations: Gross Square Footage 66.646 Access&ROW(15%) 9.996 Net Developable Area 56,650 65 units minimum The Washin ton S uare ilia ter allows an adustment to reduce the minimum b 25%. Please eview the ose statement of the Washington Square Regional Center when addressing the adjustment criteria. PROCEDURE 121 Administrative Staff Review. ❑ Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. ❑ Public hearing before the Planning Commission;. ❑ Public hearing before the Planning Conunission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPIED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE Applications submitted b mail or dro ed off at the c tinter withou Plann' Division acce tance ma be returned. The Plannin counter closes at 5:00 PM. Ma s submitted with an a licati n shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8%" x 11". On 8r/:" x 11" ma of a osed ro'ect s all also be submitted for attachment to the staff re ort or dm'' decision. A li ations`with unfolded ma shall not be'acce led, tratYve The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal: Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A l0-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard Hearing S Officer . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes acsi lo,tiil Appication/Planning Divsmon Section Page 7 of 8 This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of theprimary requirements applicable to the potential development of a particlar st and Community allow theCi staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION (County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-8884) PRIOR TO 'SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE applicants are required to completeb and file a subdivision platnaming Lre9 APPLICATION the Washinh the gt of on County accepteds der Citj;areceives/the faxednconnfirn confirmation of l napproval fromp the Co nwill not be Subdivision Name Reservation. County of the BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being as pp Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions a Minor Land Pasr'tiuonsdwhere any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the Cit 's oli is o a I those s stern develo rnent credits to the first buildin crmit issued in the deve.o ment (UNL SS OTH RWISE IRECTED BY THE DEVE PER AT THE TIME THE EMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code re uirements rior to submittin an a lication. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: A es Kowacz CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503-718-2427 FAX: 503-598-1960 EMAIL: agnesk@tigard-or.gov CITY OF T1GARD Pre-:Appication Conference Notes Ite,udenn,J AnnlicvnntPlanninn r).n nd.Str.inn Page 8 of 8 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING Q *yMllpr�,are s Community iDevefopment S kapity0 linterCommunity PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Mots): 1S12611C Westerns]ants Tax Lelia 900 Use TYDe. auartmeuts These notes have been prepared based on the information submitted by the applicant showing 60 apartment units on the subject property at 9550 SW Greenburg Rd. The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Greenburg Road in this area is under the jurisdiction of Washington County. The applicant shall meet both County requirements for traffic analysis and street improvements along with City requirements. This development will need to meet the Street and Utility Improvement Standards of TMC 18.810 along with the Washington Center Regional Center Design Standards of TMC 18.630. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets_ Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: Greenburq Road to a half-width of 49 feet from centerline (or wider if required by the County) CITYaFnrrtaa Pri-JUslitation Ceriarnee Meets Omlowmuf[epineneo Pavel et 5 Street improvements: (Subject to rough proportionality) ® Partial street improvements and/or future street improvement agreements (where allowed) will be necessary along_Greenburg Road to include: ® pavement half-width of 34 feet or wider if required by the County `,. ® concrete curb ® 5-foot planter exclusive of curb • storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 10-foot concrete sidewalk ® street trees ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: Pavement tapers as necessary It appears that the trip generation of the proposed development will be less than the TMC 18.810 threshold for requiring a traffic study. 18.705 Access and Egress The development will need to meet County standards and requirements for access to Greenburg Rd. While TMC 18.705 would require a second access for this number of dwelling units, it is recognized that due to the surrounding developed properties and short frontage on Greenburg Road, multiple accesses will not be possible. The application will need to demonstrate this. 18.730.040 Additional Setback Requirements: This section sets requirements for additional setback distance from roadways. The minimum yard requirement shall be increased in the event a yard abuts a street having a right-of-way width less than required by its functional classification on the city's transportation plan map and, in such case, the setback shall be not less than the setback required by the zone plus one-half of the projected road width as shown on the transportation map. This appears to not be applicable Agreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s)to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: (1.) This appears to not be applicable (2.) Overhead Utility Lines: Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, if approved by the City Engineer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite CITY OF TIMID Pro-Apinicatima Centennial kolas Pape 2 1115 Ieveleoued FapIoeesho side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is approved, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines across the street along Greenburg Rd, for which the fee-in-lieu will be necessary. All new utilities will need to be constructed underground. Sanitary Sewers: The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It appears that a sewer line runs along Greenburg Rd. It is possible that a connection could be made to the east. The developer will need to verify adequacy for the proposed use and pay the appropriate connection fees. Contact the Utility Billing staff for connection fees. Water Supply: The Tualatin Valley Water District provides public water service in this area. Coordinate with TVWD for information regarding adequate water supply and appropriate connection requirements for the proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District [Contact: John Wolff, 503-259-1504] provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. Provide a plan that shows how the storm drainage system for the site connects to the public system. Storm drainage plan and calculations shall be submitted with the application for it to be considered complete. Storm water detention is required for any increase in impervious area. Storm water detention facilities must be reviewed and approved by the city. Storm water detention calculations shall be submitted to the Development Engineer for review and approval. Storm drainage must connect to a public system of adequate capacity or discharge to a suitable outfall location meeting appropriate standards (such as CWS). Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in- lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious surfaces CITY Of MARC Pre-AJattea tan Conference Ms os mamma EuelHupe Pete 3 et 5 created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof. Please contact the Building Division for the current fee. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ® Construction of an on-site water quality facility. I Payment of the fee in-lieu. Water quality treatment is required. Calculations for sizing of water quality treatment facilities must be submitted to the Development Engineer for review and approval. Water quality facilities also must be reviewed and approved by the city. Review and comply with provisions of Chapter 4 Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (Runoff Treatment and Control). Other Comments: Water quality and detention facility design and construction must be certified by a professional engineer as meeting Clean Water Services requirements. After completion of the construction of these facilities, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city on city-furnished forms for long-term maintenance of the facilities. This agreement will be recorded and city staff will be periodically inspecting the facilities for compliance with the terms of the agreement. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT TAX In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) which was replaced in 2008 by a Transportation Development Tax (TDT) that became effective 7/1/09. The TDT program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TDT incorporates the proposed use of the land and the size of the project. The TDT is calculated, due, and payable at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances payment of the TDT may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TDT exceeds the TDT rate for a single-family home. Pay TDT as required. PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from Development Engineering. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in the Permit Center at City Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The PFI permit application shall include any on-site water quality and detention facilities that may be required as part of the land use approval. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: CITY Ofii ju Pre-Application Contemn Mrs hnUelaoetl Fntm.uus Page 4 el NOTE If an PR Permit is required the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers ail work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. PREPARED BY: Mike McCarthy 10/8/13 DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER DATE Phone: (503)T18-2462 E-mail: mikem@tigard-orgov Revised: March 2012 IF SJ nF TIBABa Pre-Anne:Won conference Metes Page 5 et 5 S1N2I1\ f1DOU 'IVNOI .LIQQV PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: Westerman Apts COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: 5/21 /2014 GRADING ® Existing and proposed contours shown. ® Are there grading impacts on adjacent parcels? none ® Adjacent parcel grades shown. ® Geotech study submitted? N/A STREET ISSUES ❑ Right-of-way clearly shown. Greenburg dedication ® Centerline of street(s) clearly shown. ® Street name(s) shown. ❑ Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown. Greenburg ® Street profiles shown. Not required ❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo N/A on adjacent parcel(s), etc. ® Traffic Impact and/or Access Report N/A ® Street grades compliant? ® Street/ROW widths dimensioned and appropriate? No new streets ® Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width None appropriate? ❑ Other: _SANITARY SEWER ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines shown. ❑ Stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? Extend public line to SE corner of the site. Note 1. WATER ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines w/ sizes noted? ® Existing/proposed fire hydrants shown? N/A ® Proposed meter location and size shown? N/A Z Proposed fire protection system shown? N/A STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES Existing/proposed lines shown? Show approved public connection. Note 2 ® Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention provided? ❑ Water quality/detention facility shown on plans? Provide detention and identify the type of quality facilities ® Area for facility match requirements from calcs? ® Facility shown outside any wetland buffer? N/A ® Storm stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? N/A The submittal is hereby deemed ! COMPLETE ❑ INCOMPLETE By: C APD Date: 5/14/14 REVISED: 05/22/14 May 21, 2014 Completeness Review Notes for Westerman Apts Note 1. The public sewer needs to be extended to the southeast corner of the site in a 15-foot wide easement so that it is available to serve the adjacent lot to the south. Note 2. The storm drain must connect to an approved public connection. Narrative states that the peak flow will be restricted to the predeveloped peak. However, the need for a public connection remains. There are no known public facilitates in the area indicated by"Tie to existing storm at easement". Gary Pagenstecher To: Daryl Retzlaff Subject: RE: Case File# SDR2014-00002/VAR2014-00010/VAR2014-00011 Daryl, The extension request is noted. If additional information is required I will let you know. Thank you, Gary Gary Pagenstecher,AICP Associate Planner Community Development City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Phone: 503-718-2434 Fax: 503-718-2748 Email:garyp@tigard-or.gov From: Daryl Retzlaff [maifto:darylqmwproperties.com] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 2:26 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: 'Joe Westerman'; 'Bruce Vincent' Subject: Case File # SDR2014-00002/VAR2014-00010/VAR2014-00011 Gary, Evergreen Builders would like to request a 30 day extension to the 120 day review period. Please let me know if there is any other information that you need from us regarding this request or the project as a whole. Thank you Daryl Retzlaff Project Manager Evergreen Builders, LLC. (503) 680-0045 1 Gary Pagenstecher From: Naomi Vogel <Naomi_Vogel@co.washington.or.us> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 2:26 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: Joe Westerman;Jinde Zhu Subject: Greenburg Apartments (SDR) 2014-00002 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Gary The County Traffic Engineer reviewed and found that the report did not address all the requirements in order for us to comment/review the access. They did not analyze the intersections within 600 feet (minimum influence area) and the back to back left-turn conflicts at Summit Lane and the access. We cannot approve any access until they have addressed these two items. If the applicant's engineer would like to discuss the report, they can contact Jinde Zhu at 503.846.7957. you .rvnr_Zti j ' eo ,cc�l Thank y w. U.5 Naomi Vogel, Associate Planner q� � Washington Co. -Dept. of Land Use & Transportation 1 �4� `"'a I —Z — Operations & Maintenance Division T►'A 3 cc 01cef 1l y iy 1400 SW Walnut Street, MS 51 Hillsboro, OR 97123 (503) 846-7639-Direct (503) 846-7620-Fax 1 Gary Pagenstecher From: Agnes Kowacz Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:14 AM To: Gary Pagenstecher Subject: FW: Case File SDR2014-00002/VAR2014-00010/VAR2014/00011 Attachments: (9812) Joe Westerman- 3 story building - 1 Bedroom.pdf Here is the email referring to the full lite doors on the front facade of the building for the Greenburg Apartments. Thanks, AK From: Daryl Retzlaff [mailto:daryl@jmwproperties.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 12:38 PM To: Agnes Kowacz Cc: 'Joe Westerman'; 'Bruce Vincent'; 'clay' Subject: Case File SDR2014-00002/VAR2014-00010/VAR2014/00011 Agnes, Thanks so much for taking the time to meet with Clay and I yesterday. I made the changes to the windows and entry doors that we spoke about yesterday and have updated the plan sheet associated with the 4 plex building that borders Greenburg Rd. With the full lite doors our new calculation comes to 51%. I have attached the new sheet 12 and will deliver the hard copy to the plan center this afternoon. Thanks Daryl Retzlaff Project Manager Evergreen Builders, LLC. (503) 680-0045 DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules City General Records Retention Schedule." 1 Gary Pagenstecher From: Agnes Kowacz Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2014 7:33 AM To: Daryl Retzlaff Cc: Gary Pagenstecher; Greg Berry; Naomi Vogel (Naomi_Vogel@co.washington.or.us) Subject: RE: Greenburg Project There were some issues that the County had regarding the scope of the traffic study. Please coordinate with Greg Berry (City project engineer) and Naomi Vogel (WACo project engineer). Thank you, Agnes Kowacz [ Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 503.718.2427 agnesk@tigard-or.gov From: Daryl Retzlaff[mailto:daryl©jmwproperties.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2014 7:30 AM To: Agnes Kowacz Subject: RE: Greenburg Project Thank you for all of your help on this project. Has anything come up since our last meeting that we need to know about? Good luck in your future endeavors. Daryl Retzlaff Project Manager Evergreen Builders, LLC. (503) 680-0045 From:Agnes Kowacz [mailto:AgnesK@tigard-or.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2014 6:21 AM To: Daryl Retzlaff(daryl@imwproperties.com) Cc: Gary Pagenstecher Subject: Greenburg Project Good morning Daryl- I wanted to let you know that Gary Pagenstecher will be your new project planner as I am leaving the City of Tigard. His contact information is 503-718-2434 and I have also copied him on this email. It was nice working with you and good luck with the project.Thank you, Agnes Kowacz I Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 503.718.2427 1 Gary Pagenstecher From: Shelby Rihala <shelby.rihala@jordanramis.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 5:08 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: Dan Olsen; Angela Johnson Subject: RE: Code interpretation question [IWOV-Worksite.FID1366331] Gary, I was unable to find anything in the City's Code to provide a better answer to this question. While your interpretation certainly makes sense, the Code isn't entirely clear. Note 8 to Table 18.520.2, applicable to commercial zones, says a 20 ft setback is required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. This standard would clearly trigger the 20 ft setback. However, instead of using that same language, Note 20, applicable to the MUE-1 zone where this property is located, says that the setback is 20 ft when the zone "abuts residential districts shown in Section 18.510.020," which only references the City's eight residential zones. An argument could be made that, if the City wanted the 20 ft setback achieved through Note 8 to apply to the MUE-1 zone, the Code would say so. However, as we discussed, this property is subject to the UPA with the County and is intended for future annexation by the City. Policy wise, it doesn't make sense that the City would give up the authority to enforce setbacks on a property just because one of the property's boundaries was outside the City limits. Would allowing the 8 ft setback preclude future annexation of the adjacent property by causing it to not meet any of the applicable standards? Were you able to find anything in the UPA supporting this position? Thanks, SHELBY RIHALA 1 Attorney Jordan Ramis PC Attorneys at Law From: Gary Pagenstecher [mailto:Garyp@tigard-or.gov] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 7:45 AM To: Shelby Rihala Subject: Code interpretation question Shelby, Would the following logic hold up on appeal?Or should I.not apply TDC standards to abutting unincorporated WACO property? The rear yard setback is shown as 8 feet,but note [20] in TABLE 18.520.2 requires a 20-foot setback from low and medium residential zones.The site abuts unincorporated Washington County zoned R-5.According to Table 320.1,the County's R-5 zone is convertible to the city's R4.5 zone.As such, the 20 foot setback applies to protect adjacent existing low-density residential development. Thanks, Gary Gary Pagenstecher 1 . - 11 111 TIGARD City of Tigard October 21,2014 Evergreen Builders, LLC Joe Westerman 7420 SW Hunziker Road, Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Completeness—9550 SW Greenburg Road Case File No. SDR2014-00002 /VAR2014-00010 /VAR2014-00011 Dear Mr. Westerman: The City has received your resubmittal for a 66 unit apartment complex (SDR2014-00002), an adjustment to minimum parking requirements (VAR2014-00010) and an adjustment to access standards (VAR2014-00011). The site is located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that your application was complete as of October 20th for the purpose of beginning the 120-day review period for a final decision. The formal comment and review process typically takes 4 to 6 weeks. It should be noted that staff has not reviewed the application submittal for compliance with the relevant code criteria, and that additional items may arise during the application review which may require further clarification. Should you have any questions with regard to these items, please contact me at 503-718- 2427. Sincerely, Ca - Agnes Kowacz Associate Planner cc: SDR2014-00002 Land Use File 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov 1111 N TIGARD City of Tigard September 26,2014 Evergreen Builders,LLC Joe Westerman 7420 SW Hunziker Road, Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Completeness—9550 SW Greenburg Road Case File No. SDR2014-00002 / VAR2014-00010 /VAR2014-00011 Dear Mr. Westerman: The City has received your resubmittal for a 66 unit apartment complex (SDR2014-00002), an adjustment to minimum parking requirements (VAR2014-00010) and an adjustment to access standards (VAR2014-00011). The site is located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the materials and has determined that the following additional information is still necessary before the application can be deemed complete: 1. Narrative. Please revise the narrative to address/expand upon the following criteria: • Impact Study (page 4)- Last sentence of first section refers to approval of subdivision. This is not a subdivision. I never received the revised impact study. • 18.630—Washington Square Regional Center Plan District. Section 18.630.060A — Please provide calculations of windows and total ground floor square footages demonstrating that the 50% requirement is met. This is required only along SW Greenburg Road. I am unclear how the percentage was calculated at 51%. Section 18.630.090 —All L-2 trees (parking lot trees and screening trees along the eastern perimeter) shall be a minimum of 2 1/2 inch caliper at time of planting. Please revise on landscape plans also. Not changed on plans. • 18.745 —Landscaping and Screening. Section 18.745.040- Total frontage of 100 feet shall be counted, please correct narrative to require 3 street trees. Not changed in narrative. Section 18.745.050- Buffer along the easterly perimeter shall be a minimum of 6 feet with Option #3, as provided in the buffer matrix. As proposed buffer does not meet standard. The buffer narrows down to 6 feet. the proposed buffer doesn't meet standards. Section 18.745.050.E-Please address this section. Not addressed in narrative. • 18.755—Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage. Please provide the plan that was approved with the Waste Management letter (dated 2/28/14). Site plan was not provided. Will the garbage truck actually 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov A come and pick up the container? The trash areas seem small for the truck to access the container,please clarify. 18.755.050- Section C and D were not addressed. 2. Site Plan. Please revise site plan to show: • 18.745 —Landscaping and Screening. Trees shall be planted at least 3 feet from any hard surface. Parking lot trees in the island in front of the second building on the south side do not meet this standard. Please provide 3 copies of each revised document. If re-submitting individual pages/sheets you will need to replace them in the existing packets previously submitted. Feel free to contact me with any questions at 503-718-2427. Sincerely, Agnes Kowacz Associate Planner cc: SDR2014-00002 Land Use File _ _ il Ili TIGARD City of Tigard July 16,2014 Evergreen Builders,LLC Joe Westerman 7420 SW Hunziker Road, Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Completeness—9550 SW Greenburg Road Case File No. SDR2014-00002 / VAR2014-00010 / VAR2014-00011 Dear Mr. Westerman: The City has received your resubmittal for a 66 unit apartment complex (SDR2014-00002), an adjustment to minimum parking requirements (VAR2014-00010) and an adjustment to access standards (VAR2014-00011). The site is located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the materials and has determined that the following additional information is still necessary before the application can be deemed complete: 1. Narrative. Please revise the narrative to address/expand upon the following criteria: • Impact Study (page 4)- Last sentence of first section refers to approval of subdivision. This is not a subdivision. • 18.630—Washington Square Regional Center Plan District. Section 18.630.060A — Please provide calculations of windows and total ground floor square footages demonstrating that the 50%requirement is met. Section 18.630.090 —All L-2 trees (parking lot trees and screening trees along the eastern perimeter) shall be a minimum of 2 1 inch caliper at time of planting. Please revise on landscape plans also. • 18.745—Landscaping and Screening. , Section 18.745.040- Total frontage of 100 feet shall be counted, please correct narrative to require 3 street trees. Section 18.745.050- Buffer along the easterly perimeter shall be a minimum of 6 feet with Option #3, as provided in the buffer matrix. As proposed buffer does not meet standard. Section 18.745.050.E- Please address this section. • 18.755—Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage. Please provide the trash enclosure detail. Please provide the plan that was approved with the Waste Management letter (dated 2/28/14) as well as the information required on the form (11)C 18.755.040.D.3.a-c). • 18.810—Street and Utility Improvement Standards. Please see attachments from Greg Berry. 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov 2. Site Plan. Please revise site plan to show: • 18.630 Washington Square Regional Center Plan District. Show a 6 foot pedestrian walkway throughout the development, the path measures at 5 feet. • 18.705 — Access, Egress, and Circulation. Show where path crosses parking/drive aisle and markings. • 18.745 —Landscaping and Screening. Trees shall be planted at least 3 feet from any hard surface. Parking lot trees along the north and northeast perimeter and the island in front of the second building on the south side do not meet this standard. • 18.765 — Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements. The parking spaces located along the north perimeter do not meet the standards size standards. Mark all compact spaces with a"C". Please show bicycle parking locations with dimensions and number of spaces at each location. • 18.795—Visual Clearance. Please show the visual clearance triangle. 3. Urban Forestry Plan. • Urban Forestry Supplemental Report. Please address letter F- I in Section 10, Part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. Please provide 3 copies of each revised document. If re-submitting individual pages/sheets you will need to replace them in the existing packets previously submitted. Feel free to contact me with any questions at 503-718-2427. Sincerely, m YatiNg- ' V Agnes Kowacz Associate Planner cc: SDR2014-00002 Land Use File 11111 . I a TIGARD City of Tigard May 27, 2014 Evergreen Builders,LLC Joe Westerman 7420 SW Hunziker Road, Suite D Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Completeness—9550 SW Greenburg Road Case File No. SDR2014-00002 / VAR2014-00010 /VAR2014-00011 Dear Mr. Westerman: The City has received your application for a 66 unit apartment complex (SDR2014-00002), an adjustment to minimum parking requirements (VAR2014-00010) and an adjustment to access standards (VAR2014-00011). The site is located at 9550 SW Greenburg Road. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that the following additional information is necessary before the application can be deemed complete: 1. Narrative. Please revise the narrative to address/expand upon the following criteria: • Page 10-Last sentence refers to approval of subdivision. This is not a subdivision. • Narrative refers to Exhibit A & B which do not correspond with any application materials. • 18.630—Washington Square Regional Center Plan District. Section 18.630.030—Please address this section. Section 18.630.050—Walkways shall be a minimum of 6 feet wide. Section 18.630.060A — Please provide calculations of windows and total ground floor square footages demonstrating that the 50%requirement is met. Section 18.630.090—All L-1 trees shall be a minimum of 3 % inch caliper at time of planting. Please revise on landscape plans also. • 18.745 —Landscaping and Screening. Section 18.745.040- Total frontage of 100 feet shall be counted, which required 3 street trees. The narrative states 5 trees are provided and site plan only shows 2. Fee in lieu is an option. Section 18.745.050.E- Please address this section. • 18.755 —Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage. Please address entire section. ♦ 18.765—Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements. Section 18.765.050- Please specify how many bicycle parking spaces are required and address the remaining sections B, C and D. 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov Section 18.765.070- The narrative states that the project provides 96 spaces, only 94 are shown on the site plan. Not more than 50% of the spaces can be compact. Are the garage spaces standard size? • 18.810—Street and Utility Improvement Standards. Please see attachments from Greg Berry. 2. Site Plan. Please revise site plan to show: • 18.630—Washington Square Regional Center Plan District. Show a 6 foot pedestrian walkway throughout the development. • 18.705 — Access, Egress, and Circulation. Show where path crosses parking/drive aisle and markings. • 18.745 —Landscaping and Screening. Show required number of street trees. • 18.765 — Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements. Please show bicycle parking locations. • 18.795—Visual Clearance. Please show the visual clearance triangle. 3. Urban Forestry Plan. • Urban Forestry Manual — The report shall have the following signature block with signature: "A signature of approval and statement from the project arborist or landscape architect, attesting that: 1. The tree preservation and removal site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10,part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual; 2. The canopy site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10,part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual; and 3. The supplemental report meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual." • The person who prepared the supplemental report and plan shall be either a landscape architect or a certified arborist and tree risk assessor. Please demonstrate that the preparer meets these requirements. 4. Mailing Labels. • Please provide two sets of envelopes with postage and mailing labels of property owners within 500 feet and interested parties. Please provide 3 copies of each revised document. If re-submitting individual pages/sheets you will need to replace them in the existing packets previously submitted. Feel free to contact me with any questions at 503-718-2427. Sincerely, in ( V 46A06— Agnes Kowacz Associate Planner cc: SDR2014-00002 Land Use File EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC RE OCT 13 2014CEIVED Letter of Transmittal clnOFTIGARD ING PLANNING/ENGINEER To: Agnes Kowacz,Associate Planner, City of Tigard From: Daryl Retzlaff Date: 10/13/14 Subject: Three sets of application evidence addressing the September 26,2014 incomplete letter for the Greenburg Road Apartments. Case File#SDR2014-00002/VAR2014-00010/ VAR2014-00011 Corrections have been made and additional information provided as follows: 1. Narrative • Impact Study—Revision to Impact Study provided and the sentence in question changed to refer to"this multifamily apartment complex." • 18.630—Calculations provided on plan sheet 12.There is a miscommunication between the City of Tigard and Builders Design on how the percentage is calculated. I propose to review this at our meeting on October 13'and redline this report and the plans at our meeting. • 18.630.090—see revised landscape plan sheet L 1-4.2'A" caliper trees are shown on the plans and have been specified on the preliminary plant legend on sheets L 1-3. • 18.745— a. .040 Revised landscape plan sheet L 2. Narrative changed please refer to page 20. b. .050 Revised site plan sheet 1 and landscape plans L 1-4. Landscape plan sheet L1 refers to Option 3,Type C buffer with 6'wall.This has also been addressed in the narrative on page 20. c. .050.E Revised narrative addresses this section on page 20 and 21. • 18.755—Incorrect trash enclosure plan was provided,new plan included on plan sheet 6. Original site plan that was sent to Waste Management is attached. Updated site plan sent to Waste Management also included.Approval letter reflecting the change from Waste Management included. a. 18.755.050 section C and D have been addressed on the narrative pages 22-25 2. Site Plan • 18.745—Landscape plan L 1-4.The parking lot tree in the island in question is not required for the total canopy or the parking lot canopy coverage requirements,and it has been removed from the landscape plan. Updated tree coverage calculations have been provides on plan sheets L2 and L3. 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 - 1 L"VJ5 z Ft w p- Clark Lane Design, pile < Lancscape d-rcri.itecture -Land use Plannin -Pe'elo fnent e,onst4ttin 9 q 9 URBAN FORESTRY PLAN — REVISED SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Date: July 18,2016 Project: Greenburg Road Apartments0 S Tp Project Landscape Architect: James A. Clark • 653 • Clark Land Design, PLLC 10013 NE Hazel Dell Avenue t"il James A. Clark PMB 177 yy OiEGON Vancouver, WA 98661 f� 01/31/08 360-9jclark@clarklanddesign.com V��y NO jclark@clarklanddesign.com C,gpLi Registration# LA-653 L' Tree Protection Fencing/Tree Preservation Notes: There are existing trees on adjoining properties that will be protected by perimeter fencing. There is an existing 5' chain- link fence on the north property line. This fence will serve as tree protection for off-site trees adjacent to this boundary. A 5'temporary metal chain-link fence has been installed on all previously unfenced perimeter property lines. This will serve as tree protection fencing for all off-site trees. Tree roots encountered during construction shall be severed cleanly with pruning Toppers or saw. Roots shall be cut 6-12 inches beyond work areas and excavations for curbs,walls, building footings or other improvements. Cut roots shall be protected from further damage during construction. No other supplemental specifications are proposed for this project. No growth limiting soils have been observed on the site. Existing Tree Inventory # Name Size Canopy Open or Heritage Cond. Pres. Preserve? Comments Stand Tree Rating Rating 001 Pine 18" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 002 Pine 12" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 003 Pine 12" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 004 Pine 16" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 005 Deodora Cedar 12" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 006 Pine 10" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 007 Pine 22" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 008 Cedar 12" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 009 Pine 22" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 010 Pine 16" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 011 Pine 12" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 012 Pine 12" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 013 Pine 12" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 014 Birch 8" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 015 Plum 8" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site Page I of 4 I ` Clark Lana Design, pile ..- Laq5ca-Y e f1-rckitecti4re-L u 4 Llse Pta.nnin -DeiJelogkr.ent Gonsuttinq 9 016 Maple 6" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 017 Spruce 12" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 018 Spruce 22" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 019 English Walnut 12" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 020 English Oak 18" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 021 English Walnut 10" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 022 English Holly 10" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 023 English Holly 10" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 024 English Holly 10" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 025 English Walnut 10" n/a open ' no n/a n/a no on-site 026 English Hawthorn 6" n/a open no n/a n/a no on-site 027 English Hawthorn 14" n/a open no n/a n/a no on-site 028 Dogwood 10" n/a open no n/a n/a no on-site 029 European Mt.Ash 18" n/a open no n/a n/a no on-site 030 Dogwood 16" n/a open no n/a n/a no off-site 03 I Sweet Cherry 6" n/a open no n/a n/a no on-site 032 English Holly 10" n/a open no n/a n/a no off-site 033 Maple 20" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site 034 English Holly 10" n/a open no n/a n/a no off-site 035 Dogwood 10" n/a open no n/a n/a no off-site 036 English Holly 10" n/a open no n/a n/a no off-site 037 Dogwood 10" n/a open no n/a n/a no on-site 038 Sweet Cherry 6" n/a open no n/a n/a no on-site 039 Dogwood 14" n/a open no n/a n/a yes off-site Open Grown Trees Proposed for Planting # Name Size Spread Canopy Area Soil Volume Comments 001 Acer griseum/Paperbark Maple 3.5" cal 25' 491 s.f. Over 400 c.f. Street Tree 002 Acer griseum/Paperbark Maple 3.5" cal 25' 491 s.f. Over 400 c.f. Street Tree 003 Acer griseum/Paperbark Maple 3.5" cal 25' 491 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 004 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 005 Populus tremuloides I Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 006 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 007 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 008 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal I5' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 009 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 010 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 011 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 012 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 013 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 014 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 015 Populus tremuloides 1 Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 016 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree Page 2 of 4 4 Clark Lancl Design, pile Lan4scapeti-rckitectt4re- -Lent{use Planning - peietoypnesit .onsvitttnq 017 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 018 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 019 P• opulus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 020 ' Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 021 ' P• opulus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 022 P• opulus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 023 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 024 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 025 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 026 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 027 ' Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen I.5"cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 028 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 029 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 030 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 031 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 032 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 033 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 034 ' P• opulus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 035 ' P• opulus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 036 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 037 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 038 Psuedotsuga menziesii/ Douglas Fir 6' 40' 1256 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 039 ' P• opulus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 040 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 041 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 042 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen l.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 043 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 044 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen l.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 045 Populus tremuloides/Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal 15' 177 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Site Tree 046 ' A• cer griseum/Paperbark Maple 3.5" cal 25' 491 s.f. Over 400 c.f. Street Tree 047 ' Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 048 ' Zelkova serrata/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 049 Zelkova serrato/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. ' Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 050 Zelkova serrata/Zelkova I.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 051 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 052 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova I.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 053 ' Zelkove serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 054 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 055 Zelkova serrata/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 056 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova l.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 057 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree 058 Zelkova serrate/Zelkova 1.5" cal 50' 1963 s.f. Over 1000 c.f. Parking Tree Tree Stands Proposed for Planting No tree stands are proposed with this project. Page 3 of 4 Clark Lanc1 Design, pile Lanrscape A-rcl,.itecture-Lang use pta tni iq -Pes1etopfnent Gonsuttin9 Effective Tree Canopy Cover for Overall Development Site Net Site Area: 66,533 s.f. Total Tree Canopy Area: 32,516 s.f %Canopy Coverage: 49% (33%minimum) To the best of my knowledge... 1. The tree preservation and removal plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part I of the Urban Forestry Manual; 2. The canopy site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual;and 3. The supplemental report meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. 6/8/14 James A.Clark Date Page 4 of 4 r11'�.�Cl Clark Land Design, plic La114scape,rrckitecture -Lang 145ePtannin9 -Detelopvnent consvittin RECEIVED JAN 2 8 2016 TREE FENCE INSPECTION MEMO CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING/ENGINEERING Date: January 12, 2016 Project: Greenburg Road Apartments ss LST Project Landscape Architect: James A.Clark • 653 • Clark Land Design, PLLC 10013 NE Hazel Dell Avenue r Jarsea A. Clark Jam+ PMB 177 WAGON Vancouver,WA 98661 01/31/08 360-921-4445 AC. jclark@clarklanddesign.com C[-4 Registration#LA-653 On January 12, 2016, I visited the site to inspect the tree protection fencing. Tree protection fencing was installed in accordance with L5.0 Off-site Tree Preservation Plan. Existing fencing on the north and a portion of the east side of the site is serving as tree protection fencing. Tree protection fencing for the remainder of the site is provided on the property line by a 6-foot temporary chain-link fence that is staked at intervals. The fencing complies with the plans and the Urban Forestry Manual. Photos and a revised tree preservation plan are provided with this memo. 6/8/14 James A.Clark Date Page I of 3yasr% rYf�NZH-yU aM.l rCL WJ ME1M. / ! 1 .4,,W1113.1 "I Mira'1w u ') _ dwrer�a. . tea.../ - I `• � `" In.BLVERNATRWIIEI „ w V awuEuawemEE f wamr rmE00r a I I V ( mSKNOIINus01e10fl.ii ��memneNaMNMEWMAnanwl / it : _.. - .1IM)wExrBxu NRM mMmoMcoa au u'm,ao -L 1 TIC aLIN f I 4, 5 \. .- I,ENa.rME aFRrt AVM t/' m ;e U BBSCMa PIE POWF691, �': 1:113qP mean ens ene / ‘ . 01 1 imp o emu wros. ' 406'''io, ' 4. AM ME n MIX Wail•MI Ma ml We lan.MN mell MUM WO. i \\ METAL Toff FOOTECIION FENCE I ��� MrI 0 I / / Nit, „ , -t I jf! ...M,�10 , pN ems•• : 44111111111111114, 1111 % SHEET TIRE OFFSRETREE " 0 la ' ,, ---_:. 14. ( PRESERVATION RAN ® f "� .0 NMrcenauBML. 0 ,. S I ) BewamLnea+e Igirxrncmw ro[E ` .. 4. li T.` T�e.nr4 wr u� ♦.�figi' �E L 'It.., ' axahr�e ra. .na.n u� R 1W 0.40,1CN.Mb /: R. y- tom'.! 1 s-•.zl:ti ,. �null;uNmaawrE) r "".a'o. v �M •_ ! 1 ^ l. . CCMMIM'IAM VA .reeme,sww SSSwun °..aw N+. I _ • . ° roMENLIm NmM I' emwmawm.0 FINN Y . ?��. IBrhNATOS II RMI DATE ISSUE } '. mpwATIVAIBVE 4 P NW el¢°'f1. in RL ' {�•.•:• REVISION atAnseseen 4 AM3T91"F MEE...,LErOF aWnse v,. . 'An '�°�r�- w'.ax�4 w i.*,RI EBIIX IW reot,lm MR TIE I IT-W ; n K IREE IIMEEKAMWIRNMEIAMCIMN1W m1IMJM 0 MC 11 EPICIEOPI EAL1WMI fOa5L1A 2.EM.ONNO VIRERrMNd0lle&t4EF DIMWIT, AC L*LiCW ffIENNYRMIIMANIIRIYVF RE MVRCIRNI[MZ fi1145 041YNArLYYNWS MMNHAPOEARIQ'WI.RE111.WlSCFENYW. �•l N S A BMMECIICN SLN..MEVM Fab aM 10EB M.R.IE INS r IAYTAPHF AEFAOIEGTOV MMCW M4 YIOGrHIAI MINSIAI ML.HMLY3I5505EAfNIYWk IIIWifh2 _ MM.'aolnMII E 03.4awliw.mmu.IAEMNvwurMrtNnMwxrtmllrlaMLONCNrt JOB S. 11�009 3443E NLFEEJ"AAHIh1WEOAEPIMLW WIVE IWIWmamma 111.7 O rIU +I45N OWN OM 1 , W4T611E9M 110aal.",mei,YMF 3314411E 19.VARSYYa WIIN1I M RWIi 04 ELBK1•Fr r35IONYTEM NXYN .MBE4.oIAs nNi91WX11ERIMOaSIN MJLY ma,OR BECOME DVNFi3%E IV FM1.My14 ME IIIUYL'ENCBIFC1OCEB4O1 SWF' 1'.AY-0• w_,11 x�y(�_ ry7NYf.5IWM1e MMRYIN7MYar2E!FHMAW,0MIRO Rl6AI MV 3 UMWow you Olg. .�T aa$Mla5Ew 3WM13LEBawR•SIIII••CM*MOTDURVM mSmNM SHEET wuaER VIE IM19 mEV5XNNN.EMRF&R Ii5IXE4MMMENAMWE.I grAnnestennierIWNVaWS RamndwEMMNArhOCAMn4Iw/ARRES L5,0 r wet) coNA 113 CITY OF TIGARD RECEIPT a 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard OR 97223 503.639.4171 TtGARD Receipt Number: 400850 - 12/02/2015 CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PAID SDR2014-00002 Inventory Fee-Open Grown Tree- 1st 100-0000-43116 $151.00 SDR2014-00002 Inventory Fee-Open Grown Tree-each 100-0000-43116 $724.00 add'I Total: $875.00 PAYMENT METHOD CHECK# CC AUTH.CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT Check 1040 MBILODEAU 12/02/2015 $875.00 Payor Bush Ave Apartments Total Payments: $875.00 Balance Due: $4.00 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF TIGARDIII RECEIPT 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt Number: 400851 - 12/02/2015 CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PAID SDR2014-00002 Inventory Fee-Open Grown Tree-each 100-0000-43116 $4.00 add! Total: $4.00 PAYMENT METHOD CHECK# CC AUTH.CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT Credit Card 012073 MBILODEAU 12/02/2015 $4.00 Payor: Daryl Retzlaff Total Payments: $4.00 Balance Due: $0.00 Page 1 of 1 EVERGREEN BUILDERS LLC BUILDING PERMIT RESUBMITTAL CASE # SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS Date: 11/19/15 To: City of Tigard Gary Pagenstecher From: Evergreen Builders Daryl Retzlaff RE: Building Permits Gary, Per our meeting November 16th and your email dated November 14, 2015, I would like to submit revised plans with the following changes: 1. We discussed in our meeting that obtaining a plan from PGE for transformer locations will need to be done and locations and screening will need to be approved by City of Tigard. PGE has been contacted to initiate the design process. PGE job#752213. 2. A dedicated dimensioned site plan calculating open space has been added to the plans (sheet L 6). 3. Building 2 and 3 have met the elevation standard as agreed upon at our November 16' meeting. 4. Elevation changes have been made to building 1.Sheets A1-A4 and S7 have been replaced to reflect these changes. 5. Sheet CS has been replaced as the Index Of Drawings changed to reflect the addition of sheet L6. 7420 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite D • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office: (503) 625-1183 nue-4, 6-7-tetit_ /6 WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON November 21, 2017 Julie Havelka, PE Summit Engineering, LLC P.O. Box 219263 Portland, OR 97225 RE: Greenburg Apartments - Addendum CDA# 15-917 The addendum to the plan has been approved for work to be done within the limits shown on project plans. The addendum reflects changes to the approved plans requested by the City of Tigard/Trimet to add additional sidewalk width to the bus stop on SW Greenburg Road. The approval of these plans by the Land Use and Transportation Department means that we have to the best of our ability favorably reviewed the plans for reasonableness and compliance with minimum County published standards and specifications while also incorporating the department policies. This approval does not supersede those standards and specifications, unless specifically varied by the County. Plan approval does not relieve the developer, its consultants, its contractors or its agents from responsibility for errors, omissions or for deficiencies within his control. Thank you, Michael Enloe, EIT Engineering Associate michael_enloe@co.washington.or.us cc: File Subdivision Inspections—51 Traffic Engineering — 17b Department of Land Use &Transportation Engineering and Construction Services • Engineering 1400 SW Walnut Street, MS 17, Hillsboro, OR 97 1 23-56 25 phone: 503-846-7900 • fax: 503-846-7910 www.co.washington.or.us/lut • lutengin@co.washington.or.us U N / // / r • I / / / \ ! / �`.� cowl • \` E.mye.n DuRder..LLC ..__. __-. �_.__. -____.__ c/o Joe Westerman 7420 SW IWnaAer Rood. / / Suite D Tigard,Qegen 97223 / / .3 , ,u / 1 / SEAE{.l ,•am 01 / / ` /, ! / NoOrl Grcenburg Rood 1 / 9550 SW Apartments Rood / / Tigard.OR 97202 $ / °-�- / / E1�1NG U1ILNT PEDESTAL 111 25 E.VAtk Mc. - - - - - - - - - - - - 11125 (5 ) M 3 / / Porllond,OR 97220 1 OlRce: (303)252-3453 r EXISTING EXPANSION JOINT -- - -APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING /REPLACE DNE EXRTBIG / RIGHT-OF-WAY BASED ON PRIOR COUNTY PANEL 1111-11ET BUS SURVEYS. NOT FIELD LOCATED. / / A/art POST SIGH / IIII SW GREENBURG RD AT SW LEHMAN RD / �/,a� A / TRI-MET BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTS CO 1/ / /EPDXY INTO-- M1 "® IIQ4. SCALE I". 10' I, 1 MST. PANEL -WWI /NYA w L //! / /51MP90N 3' ��- MIN. EMBED. 7 SrrMwa .-Mr LOA I.AV / / BOTTOM. ) r- rrp,L9 P11012 / / SIDEWALK EXTENSION PER WASH.CO. 1 e•orweiP0./IMIYs SS sLGINfF J/0 13' .r, STANDARD DETAIL 2110 INA .Y�AY OMPdM.WPddo ,V V.� q Z` �2 v / / SIDEWALK AWAY FROM CURD 'e ItTOg Vr WOW. ....;eh eq.IBM A / /......� _ C�r.r1-1-1----------- ERINEf&1DI01g ... `-_ mar [__..nodwreNor40 CORSNGII>015 _ Llw MINI NG ILcP[SF MONKS YN uu GENERAL NOTES I /y. L.--Y. x.n1.1,Or SUN NI Lo.Tn,s /( Lw.01 we.0*rq tic MO ME NO1 10 S MO CO 1, THIS DRAWING IS NOT BASED ON A FIELD SURVEY AND I Rrl*USW HIM wolf./ N Ixr orsA. NOTICE 7O EXCAVATORS' UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE NO1 SHOWN. ALL UTILITIES AND `-En.r A.d Compost EWeA L Aer WINA ION. J ATTENTION: OREGON LAW REQUIRES YOU SERVICE LATERALS, WHETHER PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, MUST BE SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO CURB / :7TO FOLLOW RULES ADOPTED BY THE VERIFIED DY THE CONTRACTOR IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO OREGON UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER, CONSTRUCTION. RCMSION SCHEDULE: THOSE RULES ARE SET FORTH IN OAR 2. FXCAVA90N: EXCAVATE FOR SLABS.PAVING AND OTHER • 952-001-0010'BOROUGH OAR IMPROVEMENTS TO SIZES AND LEVELS SHOWN OR REQUIRED. REVISION OELIA BSUE DAIS 952-001-0090. YOU MAY OBTAIN ALLOW FOR FORM CLEARANCE AND FOR PROPER COMPACTION COPIES OF THE RULES BY CALLING THE OF REQUIRED BACXFILLING MATERIAL.EXCAVATORS MUST : CENTER COMPLY WIH ORS 757.541 THROUGH 757.571: EXCAVATORS (ME� 111F Tr.rVMW euuw rr FP Eno SHALL NOTIFY ALL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR LINE LOCATIONS 72 1���o'r��~ r4i1 Ora �ti ni THE OREGON UTILITY NOTIFICATION HOURS(MINIMUM)PRIOR 10 START O'WORN. DAMAGE TO .1.N.m WorYo..TO No 11.eYM S roof err Moo.*Wld.VOMr Wotan CENTER IS 503-232-1987). UTLITES SHALL BE CORRECTED AT THE CONTRACTOR'S memo rom MA IOTrrm ARMY(MnaO.N e.nW GY WA A..xn 1.Y. EXPENSE. a.r1..Yr moron d Mood Y..r To More Alrmd1 .11nr1YMdR 3. EXISTING RIGHTS-OF-WAY ARE SHOWN BASED ON EXISTING P.V.wPh*.P.m*moo..d.NAM And Al k0*.AM Ft Mama SIR root POTENTIAL UNDERGROUND FACILITY OWNERS COUNTY SURVEYS 23460 AND.32055.NO BOUNDARIES MERE Bdsr�oLl.I e.lr.NaWl11MAAMrrtA•AWa / FELD LOCATED. / 7 DigSafely. E.w...M.RI..",Morrow 1NAw1•1 CO 6YY..O:..Nnmtr.lRCMxM SHEET TITLE' Cal the Oregon One-Call Center EMT mown* Of P..r.P I"°°°' Nr'°°° MAK•lo Mork p.EMMYIr SW GREENBURG YYW DINYn Or Prr'n'.r.00lYwlr Ml O MA Ilrw IWIAw.1MYr DIAL 811 or 1-800-332-2344 J_ s.a+1 P. InCola Pr Do In 1,!OM a ad.r.A Wm r wr.Max TRI-MET rING MOND OPAL OR w.m"m^ " .n ma is Os Meld Oro run IMPROVEMENT EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBERS ENs 7.Atmm odohmn� l..lCOY N•1 Menlo}r A le . .. Contuse -.-I1- .- \� IWanlAdrn.MYCTru N..M I.rA plerR NMY1rYlYMd AM.1K PLAN UR NW NATAL GAS 1 nrcm.nwpw M-F Tom-6pn, 503-225-4211 E1L4313 --SIDEWALK EXTENSION " WASHINGTON mum P.C.CONCRETE AFTER HOURS 503-226-4211 4.. `corm-non Ord WE. SIDEWALK DETAIL / ._/ TOVISOORTAPOE (503)570-4407 4„ �ggg Syr DRAYM BY: MN CEN1URWiNX 1-800-373-I511 M1 ET.w:vwVII R!Weln Rrsma DA"' 3/18/2011 1"".°Ie 2110 API'NOVEO BY:JUT I-BOO-ART-1000 SECTION A-A row11roe / -7 19 NTS EX1 WASI INGTON COUNTY CASE FILE *15917 JOB NO: SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW- 11/20/2017 15- CWv1Mw\0ww x.nl+'M1wIV,w o..r.r...Voµr.-In.q r./1yp+.0m>r,w 1. 'R.- •a„µRV ..f ,sk it ,�\ !� A',4 f, a s " VA' ,- pe6 �'4,:s��`,{ }'?� ♦ .F�f'-'e. 4/1 t- +_; .♦Y'4 \ '' �, ' ,R S�3 R- tt,' 't• { ':�• ier r ;r c ? ,.... c., . ,�4 •,. '! Y• 4R �., '� �, • `�1 •ter '� r' a. }1, ` *.,. q i 4 j.^F , , Y•ir,. Cap � %l t F fs 1. a* .,� � Tj/� , .� 'jar r •• _ t +.. � y7, 4 ,��! -'*` ,. :) ! ijN� FYI • ,;,�f R si_* MS '� �7,. _ - t � -� �_ vim , ' 61 A - .ggx ,.{.p .. . .+Ike 1 ( " ,. -• �y ' ; ' It �A.r `! ! ': � • r , st, :1a�t`:ya. , - .'w1 r r ii , `� K5 / f • Ss . r , I �i ,h .. #r,t • r sr !',' 1 ;", �aINdIB1�BU5I1E55 , ..-••o. — 14 1 •- ' !.L _ Y` R 'k Y 1, Y __ '.�. yam., $. ,v, e+�' % iRYY • E $N f ti v •• Sir.,-. •, �o.•, 4 • R44 : s �� sty r ,R- 444.61. •-F'.sw.�.�+y..-' 1 . 4 -- .e..�•ygty-,`r y,:i•- ;.�, ,.L,�F: � • ,,` •- - Mil 4' a'Y`•F ... - .•,r ,•'1,jir ^�� sR lv..CMr_.RR ;.e "`!T ,4•�4• ;•1. .. il • r r• I4 r. �� f�.r v. - vq. . �t- T —V .r_-•:� .r . ._ half." �' s. ,... 7,, 1 / r /• �, _- a l �ti 3 - r I .8‘:::_, ,,, , .KF • • — y R i.i A i r ;a. • _ • i y 1 , i fir I. _ e$3` ice- ; r; .. r. 10 _.< e . F Qi. /3//414.14-revus-444.4.4) coquic.4,..e 5-0C-es /45.k.--(4%( 4.0 Clark Land Design, pllc Lttn4sc tpeArc(atectNre -.Gang use planHin9 -Pei;etvpinent GoxsuttinJ Date: November 16, 2017 Project: Greenburg Road Apartments ti+�s1 S T�/�, Subject: Installation of Tree Soil �v '•IO • 653 • Project Landscape Architect: James A.Clark r Jme A. Clark Clark Land Design, PLLC 0[Oe801P 9901 NE 7' Avenue,Suite A-214 01/31/0B Vancouver,WA 98685 60-921-4445 co,C,, jclark@clarklanddesign.com Registration#LA-653 Tree soils were installed in accordance with the Urban Forestry Manual,the approved plans,and their scope of work per the excavation contractor and the landscape contractor. The attached plan shows additional tree soil installations that were placed:either in addition to the soil placements shown on the approved plans,or to compensate for tree soils removed in locations where transformers or other utilities prevented the installation of tree soils as shown on the approved plans. Covered Soil The material excavated during mass grading was stockpiled and mixed on site per manufacturers recommendations last summer and fall as we were doing mass excavation.Topsoil was mixed with I" minus rock and Soilworks Soiltac Dirt Stabilizer.The soil was placed in conjunction with rocking and compacting the parking lot last fall prior to the rainy season. Open Soil Excavation was performed after the onsite curbs were installed. Excavation was performed with a small excavator and by hand.Three-way soil mixture was imported and installed. Sincerely, 11/16/2017 James A.Clark Date Attachments: Plan showing additional soil volumes placed. Scope of work documents for excavation contractor and landscape contractor. Osrete, 801L VOLUME TABLE !mil � ' ........ .� .�.. —.....MILT C.11m.,«Q. a.n.Q,pl.. ,Ota..E..pYw -W Y iiitlICF6 4 a.11N. a laP wP sP IpI1P �_. MMW. W 1�yi s '� fly. a aP wP mP mP ' � � / Moo v JmP SSW eC1P IMP' sr MO. Or WNW CY Id , ON !r. 9 latl WI a, mP IIIIP 0. PO ilea a IYP MCP INP MMtl 55 OM MI e!. W (` r Oq PIY. W ;NYP UMW IaP .a)P LUJ i N Moe W II a )•. a — pp 1}pP SWP 1J iaF ! (/ yWWwN� - ai as it. q IM Cs GP MU, I_a �J�f ................r—r..._.. ___V •....... aW Rasa a Ill's aTO ,117 n IOW JJJJ _ a MY W I.WI V laP I mP 35.E Moms_ .-- ST'•s. ® W 4mP MO, pi Cr I,aP (� • Ili. .aNa.•v . nomnodl.Wl.QoK.LLEE.WAo.nWi5.IFMNUrxcwen oaaomccaeoe.acn.onP EwwnO.W I:I NnSQ I.CO[m±W IOMRNi.a 4PVir 4F"°XL.'ONf0.mwaaaO®rfntt SPOT'�'��MY�• TIMM1wtrYe M4rtTISI nlYW ,M0SloEGW100TMAMw 11 - a.erv.rmrof.crveoc iu fliR r1 INF&wt n.ole0 exw Q✓novma deanrwewnc.a.wW LC loPKw Qtl94R11Y1?w tlINTE MRIMYMO.MMMRKMdnM1r•iPW.1MW W Ls.14n.RW14ttMIKM MYPV V f Nm.m WnaIWrCaaaaa waevM're am IIID Maw,ancoe4y.®M0 NW I6bE.Mwawl wrre lwlo NM. J' •� f'�fl�y NmW4101xrtlu..nalm romaaEarmerwreorcurmlrrlarwPxrP wlwz.Wmulnleemeaa To Mar, /A beidateLneMIIIIMIZXVIMMITS *II - � if � waiov TE NM RM AP aw Ianci MIMAM NnweEaMbill PW'r`Qr+a'aelinawMOOR owrM nae YC H S co .2E- mama .....„... a.a G ', r ipi/i ,£' r kr r .1.41,:4,0 A0A 1-,,O4 6\.4,11 1%' ,, .%,, 4:O4V,1 b ... .,, 1 11,1 I1IEE y . ._r art . sea w aE u 1\,iirli 44.,,me 1..,:. - _ALVe.:it'v`.... 41/411411154t i : =:.'-.==.....-.. N‘f — —der ��. `✓ �. a,,, •! +. w�. naW..o.w.MMW _ N.. CO tier a..N,e W. _ _ i ��. �,. aexz 61 Maas, ^ RENNIN I s .% 1 SCAM r•Ar.O. 1 Know Mel below. swEr wow # 9Y eE�e W .'I - 1 ._ � 0 Call before you erg. L4.0 COW€2 — ✓tA L A s t-"b C'�-* r EXHIBIT "B" SCOPE OF WORK All work to conform to plans, specs and the Geotechnical ReportScope Page I of 11 Demo, Clearing, Grading, Excavation, Paving, Wet Utilities, Off-Site Public Improvements and Dry Utilities. The Subcontractor shall furnish all labor,materials,equipment,services and competent supervision incidental thereto necessary and required to perform all Demo, Clearing, Grading, Excavation, Off-site Paving, Utilities(Water/Fire/Sewer/Storni/Joint Trench) and off site work for the aforementioned project according to approved plans, specifications, inspection and approval of all state and local inspecting agencies as well as the Owner,Lender, Owner's Representative, and shall include,but is not limited to the following: This contract specifically includes, but is not limited to,the following items of work. Subcontractor will provide material,equipment and labor necessary to complete all Demo, Clearing, Grading, Excavation, Off-site Paving,Utilities(Joint Trench/Water/ Sewer/Storm),rain drains and foundation drains, off-site Street Lights and Off Sites for the Greenburg Road Apartments. This to include but not be limited to: all erosion control means, methods,maintenance and remediation; all on-site and off-site clearing including demolition of known organic and man-made elements; on-site and off-site grading, excavation, and soils construction per grading plan, landscape plan and soil's engineers recommendations; export/import of all materials and soils necessary to balance site;on- site and off-site base rock supply and construction, export/import and placement of all amended soils and covered soils, off-site paving, striping,and signage; construction of all building pads; back-fill of all structural foundations; all utility spoils export; final grading; concrete flatwork base rock prep; supply and installation of all wet(sanitary sewer, storm sewer domestic water, and fire water),on-site underground utility systems (PGE, fire alarm, Verizon, Comcast, etc.Plans and pricing to follow)complete; supply and installation of public sanitary and storm sewer systems complete; supply and placement of all flatwork,asphalt paving and curbs in public right of way; supply and installation of all surface improvements per public improvement plans,and all traffic control associated with this scope of work. Subcontractor acknowledges that he is the Demo, Clearing, Grading, Excavation, Off-site Paving, Utilities contractor and it is the intention of the Subcontractor and Contractor that all aspects of Demo, Clearing, Grading, Excavation,Paving, Utilities are included,without"gaps"or omissions. Contract is lump sum and quantities listed on proposal are for subcontractor's reference. Subcontractor asserts that he can complete this contract with adequate manpower to operate with the scheduling requirements of the Contractor. Boundary of Work: Subcontractor shall complete accordingly: • All improvements in the"Greenburg Rd.Frontage Improvements Plans" • All private improvements associated with the development of Greenburg Road Apartments • Erosion Control and Earthwork,Installation&Maintenance • Clear Site of all existing materials organic and man made • All work per project Geotechnical Report and Addendums Excavation 11 Scope of Work Greenburg 5/25/2016 1 . Scope Page 2 of 11 Scheduling—Subcontractor shall meet within 3 days of executing this contract to agree upon the governing construction schedule. Upon execution of this Contract the Subcontractor shall submit the following submittals, as well as others required by the construction documents for Architect/Engineer and Jurisdiction review with 3 days: • Asphalt Mix Designs • Rock Source—qualification of rock source(s) shall be approved prior to import of rock to site. • Foundation,Footing and French Drains • Traffic Control Plan • Storm Sewer Submittal of Materials—(i.e.Catch Basins, Area Drains,French Drains, Pipe, Manholes, Clean-outs,Fittings, Back water valves, swale, detention tanks and/or basins, etc.) • Sanitary Sewer Submittal of Materials—(i.e. Pipe, Manholes, Clean-outs,Fittings, Back water valves,etc.) • Domestic Water Submittal of Materials—(i.e. Pipe,Fittings, Valves,Double Check devices, Thrust block or restraints, Valve Surface Caps, frost-free hose bib) • Fire Water Submittal of Materials-(i.e.Pipe, Fittings, Valves,Double Check devices, Thrust block or restraints,Valve Surface Caps, frost-free hose bib) • Erosion Control—Materials and Cut sheets showing manufacturer's recommended installation of devices. • All other submittals requested by plans, specifications, landscape engineer, soils engineer,and/or jurisdiction authority. Subcontractor has visited the site and accepts all conditions as-is. As-is condition shall constitute the origin of Subcontractor's work. PERMITING AND COORDINATION OF WORK AND RESPONSIBILITY Subcontractor shall coordinate with Contractor's Superintendent,governing authorities, consultants, and other trades, including but not limited to: 1. City, State,and Federal Codes pertaining to scope—Subcontractor shall be licensed and qualified by all levels of jurisdiction for construction of improvements associated within this scope. Subcontractor shall immediately identify his company as the contractor performing city work and be bound to all requirements of the public works permits as they pertain to this scope, in essence activating the public works permit. Owner shall pay for public improvement permit only. Subcontractor shall design,make application for and secure all accessory permits required to complete scope including,but not limited to;traffic control, night work, hauling, etc. Subcontractor is responsible for coordination of all testing and final approval of underground utilities. Subcontractor shall attend all pre-construction meetings with professionals listed above and provide feedback to questions regarding this scope. Excavation 11 Scope of Work Greenburg 5/25/2016 2. OHSA—Subcontractor shall complete all aspects of this scope in strict ope Page 3 of ! accordance with OHSA standards and regulations. Contractor reserves the right impose fines to Subcontractor or suspend subcontractor employees from working on-site until evidence has been presented that indicates employee has received additional training and to terminate this contract based upon repeated violations. Subcontractor shall hold regular"tail-gate"safety meetings and submit evidence of such meetings to Contractor on a regular basis. 3. Architect, Civil Engineer, Surveyor, and Special Inspections—Subcontractor shall thoroughly review plans prior to commencing work and request clarification in writing of potential conflicts. Subcontractor shall verify survey is in accordance with the approved plans and notify the Contractor of any discrepancies in writing. Subcontractor shall work directly with professional consultants to the extent required to complete and accurately document construction of improvements. Subcontractor is responsible for restoring or establishing all compaction requirements as specified by the special inspector/soils engineer. Subcontractor has been provided a landscape plan and a soils report for the site and assumes conditions as they are documented. Subcontractor has included wet weather remediation to allow construction to continue through the typically wet winter/spring. Subcontractor has examined site with relation to neighboring properties and has included any shoring(design, engineering and installation)that may be required. 4. Soils Volume—Subcontractor has reviewed the soils volume table and the Urban Forestry Manual.Materials are to be stored on site from suitable materials generated from road and building pad grading. Materials are to be mixed,placed and compacted per plans and specifications in conjunction with the grading of the parking lot. 5. Coordination of Soils Storage with Contractor—Subcontractor shall place trench spoils in accordance with the Contractor's approval. This to include knocking down or laying out trench spoils in approved locations. Subcontractor will be responsible for all spoils generated from this scope of work until final placement in approved location. Subcontractor is responsible for the protection,repair,and final placement of all improvements exposed at the surface prior to final pavement. Subcontractor shall submit evidence of testing approval for all underground utilities prior to placement of AC pavement. If the Subcontractor's work is deemed incomplete or fails after placement of AC pavement,the Subcontractor shall be wholly responsible for the removal and restoration of AC pavement,hard surfaces, landscape, striping, and any other completed improvements comprised in the effort to repair the deficiency. 6. Concrete Subcontractor(Foundations and Flatwork) - Subcontractor shall hold a pre-construction meeting with both the structural foundation subcontractor and the concrete flatwork subcontractor prior to excavation or preparation of base rock to receive concrete. Subcontractor shall establish depth of excavations and sub base acceptance standards with Concrete subcontractor during pre- Excavation D Scope of Work Greenburg 5t25f2016 Scope Page 4 of 11 construction meeting. Subcontractor shall supply concrete subcontractor with a flat or stepped building pad.Excavation for foundation to be done by others. A written log of definitive elevations shall be recorded and delivered to the Subcontractor. Note: Accurate Finish Floor elevations are critical to the design of site flatwork. Buildings must be placed+/-.1" from plan. 7. Landscaper—Subcontractor shall hold a pre-construction meeting with Contractor & Landscaper to establish final sub grade elevations of all landscape areas. Coordination between subcontractors for open and covered soils volume will be done at this time. Written documentation shall be provided to Contractor for approval. Subcontractor is ultimately responsible for all positive drainage away from buildings and to area drains. If completed improvements do not drain,the Subcontractor shall be held fully responsible for all corrective actions and restoration of in-place improvements. Rough grades to be+/->1". 8. Plumber, Fire Sprinkler Installer—Subcontractor shall hold a pre-construction meeting with the plumbing and fire sprinkler subcontractor to coordinate elevation of laterals. Written documentation of agreed elevations shall be provided to the Contractor and may differ from elevations shown on approved plans provided modifications do not infringe upon applicable codes. Subcontractor shall run all laterals to within 5 feet vertically and 5 feet horizontally of the foundation regardless of lateral distance scaled on drawings with exception to fire sprinkler supply lateral to buildings in which subcontractor shall run fire sprinkler lateral into building footprint and terminate pipe 12"above finish floor with a flanged connection. The 5 feet vertically may increase in depth if approved by the connecting trade, but at no time shall laterals be left further than 5 feet horizontally. Subcontractor shall post a"Lateral Connection Log"in the Contractor Construction Trailer identifying which trade made final connection of the lateral. The rules for connections shall be as follows: the first trade to arrive at the point of connection shall mark connection point with an identifying marker visible above grade made to survive typical construction traffic;the last trade to reach the point of connection shall be responsible for making final connection of the lateral. Subcontractor shall coordinate flushing and testing procedures with the plumbing and fire sprinkler contractors to avoid contamination and flow of site utilities born debris into buildings. 9. Electrical, Low Voltage, and Landscaper—Subcontractor shall hold a pre- construction conference with electrical, low voltage, and irrigation to layout all Subcontractor provided crossing sleeves both on-site and off-site. All buildings will be connected for fire alarms with conduits. Subcontractor will provide and install conduit,plans to follow at a later date for pricing. Subcontractor will provide pricing prior to commencement of work. 10. Site mobility—Subcontractor shall perform scope in a manner that first creates and then allows other trades reasonable access to the site and communicate daily with the Contractor to avoid scheduling conflicts(i.e. concrete pours,deliveries). Excavation II Scope of Work Greenburg 525/2016 Scope Page 5 of 1 I EROSION CONTROL—Pertains to all portions of work and includes other trade mobility over the site. Subcontractor shall perform all erosion control and environmental health dust prevention methods and means required by city,county, state, and federal regulations while performing the scope of this contract. Subcontractor shall install a wheel wash as shown on plans. Subcontractor is responsible for compliance and subcontractor implementation of all terms of both the City of Tigard Erosion Control and Clean Water Services permit and all governing bodies' regulations for the respective activities included in this scope. Subcontractor has made allowances for and shall comply with all request made by the jurisdiction of authority as it pertains to erosion and dust control. Subcontractor shall properly and effectively cap the site daily in a manner that eliminates after-hours violations. An approved erosion control plan shall serve only as a benchmark and the subcontractor shall exceed means and methods implied on the approved erosion control plan to a level acceptable to City of Tigard and Clean Water Services and a representative of the EOR. Subcontractor shall create and maintain all required site documentation as a portion of providing erosion control measures. Contractor will provide one on-site water source. Subcontractor is responsible for the transfer of water across site. Subcontractor shall establish and maintain haul roads capable of supporting loaded dump truck. Subcontractor assumes that sub grade damages (pumping, contamination of rock) is likely along haul roads and has made allowances for repair of these areas prior to paving. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES Subcontractor shall construct an adequate staging pad for the placement of Contractor's construction trailer. Subcontractor shall also provide an all-weather parking area in front of the construction trailer. Subcontractor shall install a conduit based electrical distribution system for both trailer power and construction power. DEMO,CLEARING,GRADING, EXCAVATIONS,AND BACKFILLING- Subcontractor has accepted all site conditions as-is and shall complete all earthwork in accordance with the plans, soil's and landscape engineer's recommendations, and field direction. Subcontractor shall dispose of all trash and debris currently on-site. Subcontractor shall terminate all utility services to the existing improvements in accordance with jurisdiction specifications. Subcontractor shall perform all clearing and grubbing of work boundary,including off-site removal of all excess soil,debris, strippings,and subcontractor generated construction waste. This to include,but not limited to demolition and removal of all hardscape, curb,trash,trees, bushes, stumps, underground existing utilities as noted on plans, and known organic or man-made existing improvements necessary to complete improvements. Subcontractor has excluded all blasting or mechanical means of concrete or rock removal that would require means above and beyond conventional excavation or loading of material. Subcontractor shall immediately install all erosion control means and measures to obtain an approved inspection prior to exposing the site soils. Subcontractor shall construct and maintain until paving all construction entrances. Subcontractor to maintain safe,erosion free access to the site at all times. These to include suitable granular material capable of preventing dust erosion or wheel wash facility to prevent tracking of soils onto existing improvements. Subcontractor shall perform all site grading including all import and Excavation Ii Scope of Work Greenburg 5252016 Scope Page 6 of 11 export of material and will perform all cut and fill activities. All cuts and fills are to be approved by the soils engineer for both acceptability of material and compaction. Subcontractor to store, mix,place and compact all covered soil per soils volume table. Subcontractor shall maintain records of all inspections and testing. Subcontractor has verified the existing site grades as they relate to finish grades per plans, specifications, and soils report,and assumes responsibility for all soil quantities. Subcontractor shall construct all building pads and roads,establishing approved sub grades, placing compacted approved sub base rock on building pads and under over excavated footings, and approved haul-road material prior to placement of sub base rock on roads. Subcontractor shall work soils until Soils Engineer has approved soils for cover at all building pads,hardscape surfaces, wall footings,and traffic surfaces. Subcontractor shall also remove or reuse all trench spoils and building foundation spoils. Subcontractor has reviewed the soils report for this property and shall construct all building pads,hardscape areas, and traffic areas according to the recommendations and specifications prescribed. Subcontractor shall complete final grading to within+/- .1' of established landscape sub grades. Subcontractor is ultimately responsible for all positive drainage away from buildings and to area drains. If completed improvements do not drain,the Subcontractor shall be held fully responsible for all corrective actions and restoration of in-place improvements. Site shall be considered balanced and final grading complete(no more import or export)when all hard surface improvements are in-place and landscape subcontractor has accepted remaining landscape grades. Subcontractor has included wet weather mediation to allow construction to continue through wet seasons of the year. Subcontractor to ensure that soil integrity is maintained throughout the scope of work and prevents negligent operations upon the soils,which would compromise the structural integrity of the soils. EXCAVATION AND PAD/SLAB& OTHER IMPROVEMENT PREPARATION AND BACKFILL-SUBCONTRACTOR shall receive approval from soils engineer prior to proceeding with structural foundation excavation. Subcontractor is responsible for excavating and prepping building pad to place concrete foundations for the apartment building and associated structures(footing excavation by others). Concrete subcontractor shall chalk or paint all lines of excavation for Subcontractor. Subcontractor shall have sub grade inspected and approved prior to placing rock section under footings. Subcontractor shall supply and compact all rock for the building pad to be minimum 5' out from the building envelope.After footing and foundation walls have been installed, Subcontractor shall install raindrain and footing drains and backfill concrete improvements. Subcontractor shall use material approved by Soils Engineer to backfill concrete improvements. Subcontractor will be expected to perform short-term temporary dewatering as conditions required to keep work moving forward. This general note includes small engine powered sump pumps. Excluded from this condition is a permanent or long-term installation of continuous de-watering systems, storage tanks,or treatment of pumped water. PAVING Excavation II Scope of Work Greenburg 5252016 Scope Page 7 of 11 Subcontractor will install all offsite A.C. Paving per City of Tigard and Washington County requirements.. The paving will be installed with as many move-ins as necessary to accommodate the contractor's production schedule. The subcontractor's work shall conform to ADA specifications regarding slopes on finished surfaces. The A.C.Paving will be feathered in to match any elevations that are established. The Subcontractor will be responsible for the cleaning and repair of the paving prior to final acceptance. Subcontractor shall ensure that all underground utilities have been installed prior to paving. Subcontractor shall remove and restore all hard surfaces at no cost to Contractor if Subcontractor's underground improvements have been omitted or have failed. Subcontractor is to obtain approval from all jurisdictions. The Subcontractor shall install all off site pavement striping and markings,required surface painting and all signage per plans. Subcontractor shall build planters and the adjacent areas to the soils volume plan with soil approved by the Landscape Architect. Soil is to be left 6"down from the top of planter. Landscaper will provide and place the remaining soil mixture. Subcontractor shall supply and place all concrete form material required for all off site curbs,approaches and sidewalks. Subcontractor shall obtain approved inspection tickets for all in-place formwork by the City of Tigard and Washington County prior to pour. If Subcontractor fails to receive approved inspections and decides to pour concrete anyway, the Subcontractor shall be fully responsible for corrections on all future concrete flatwork deficiencies in regards to poured area. Subcontractor shall provide and place all under- sidewalk drains. Subcontractor is responsible for all transfer of concrete from supply trucks to final placement, including but not limited to,mixer chute, line pump,boom pump,wheel barrel. The Subcontractor shall coordinate with Contractor a location for "wash-out"of concrete trucks. Subcontractor will be responsible for clean up and removal of any "wash-out" in locations not agreed upon in advance. Subcontractor is to clean up excess or spilled concrete and remove from site when forms are stripped. All concrete shall be poured in accordance to the approved plans and conform to all local codes in respect to dimensions,rise and run lengths,maximum slopes,etc. Subcontractor shall verify and seek the approval of the governing authority in regards to all questionable formwork prior to pour. Correction of concrete that is rejected after poured will be the sole responsibility of the subcontractor. Subcontractor is responsible for protecting all freshly poured concrete and shall be responsible for finish quality until concrete has been accepted by the City of Tigard and Washington County with Final Inspection approval. Subcontractor shall place protection flagging around all freshly poured concrete. UTILITIES Excavation I1 Scope of Work Greenburg 5/252016 Scope Page 8 of 11 Subcontractor will be expected to perform short-term temporary dewatering, as conditions require keeping work moving forward. This general note includes small engine powered sump pumps. Excluded from this condition is a permanent or long-term installation of continuous de-watering systems,storage tanks,or treatment of pumped water. TRENCH EXCAVATION AND COMPACTION Subcontractor shall perform any saw cutting,AC,and excavation of trenches required to complete this scope. Subcontractor agrees to coordinate placement of native spoils with Contractor. Subcontractor is responsible for export of all asphalt, concrete, non-native or native material that is deemed unusable on-site. Subcontractor is ultimately responsible for establishing compaction as required by soils engineer and/or governing jurisdiction as a means of restoring all subcontractor excavations. Subcontractor may use native backfill where acceptable by Soils Engineer in Landscape areas and compactable by Subcontractor. Subcontractor shall backfill all utility trenches in roads or other hard- surface areas with granular material. DOMESTIC WATER AND FIRE WATERS SYSTEM Subcontractor shall construct a complete private domestic water system. Water and fire systems include all double check valves and back flow detectors,valves,vaults, lids, etc. Water shall tie in at the back of the city supplied meter and terminate within 5' of all buildings.Coordination with the landscaper to locate tie in for irrigation water will be done at this time. Fire sprinkler supply,which will be run to the property line by the City will be tied onto by the Subcontractor and shall be run into each building entry per plan terminating 12"above finish floor with a flanged connection. Subcontractor will be responsible to supply and install all fire hydrants with associated pipe bollards per plans and details. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM Subcontractor shall construct a complete private sanitary sewer system. This to include but not be limited to; sewer tie in,all pipe, fittings,laterals,clean-outs,man-holes,pipe bedding, and testing(including TV camera inspections if required). System shall originate at the public sewer main connection(s)and terminate within five feet of each building. Subcontractor shall test,protect,repair, and make final adjustments of all improvements prior to placement of concrete. STORM WATER SEWER SYSTEM Subcontractor shall construct a complete storm water system as shown on plans. This to include but not be limited to,catch basins,area drains, inlet drains,flow through planters, underground storm water detention pipe,rain drains,footing"French drains" drains, back water valves,access vault of tile for bwv,pipe, fittings,clean-outs,under-sidewalk transfer drain,pipe bedding,and testing. This system shall originate at the public storm sewer connection(s) and terminate at a catch basin,downspout, flow through planters, French drain, or area drain. Subcontractor shall test storm water system prior to paving (Including TV camera inspections if required). Catch Basins—Subcontractor shall install all catch basins true to site improvement elements. Crooked or unparallel installation will require repair prior to paving. Excavation n Scope of Work Greenburg 51252016 Scope Page 9 of I I Area Drains—Subcontractor shall install all area drains shown on plans and adjust rim elevations to collect area surface water. Area Drains shall include all trench drains shown on plans where the Subcontractor shall only bring a storm connection. Rain drains and downspouts—Subcontractor shall install all rain drain systems at the building. Some laterals to these buildings are not shown on plans, but the Subcontractor has included a storm water lateral to and a complete rain drain system for the building. Footing Drain—Subcontractor shall install and connect for all "Footing"drains systems at the building as recommended by Soils Engineer. Subcontractor shall also supply and install a subsurface drainage system utilizing perforated pipe around the building. Subcontractor shall install a backwater prevention valve where the water from the connecting storm sewer may back into the perforated drainpipe. Subcontractor shall also install a vault or other approved box to provide accessibility to backwater valve. Water meter and SDC fees are excluded from this contract. DRY UTILITIES Subcontractor shall supply and install a complete dry utility conduit system for Portland General Electric, Telephone Communications,Fire Alarm and Cable. This to include, but not be limited to excavation, backfill, conduits,vaults,junction boxes,pull string, and as-builds of installation. Subcontractor shall supply and install sleeves under hard surfaces for the electrical subcontractor, low-voltage fire alarm subcontractor,and low- voltage sprinkler system subcontractor under all paved surfaces. Subcontractor shall coordinate all inspections with appropriate franchised utilities and jurisdictions of authority. Joint trench plans are not available at this time. Prices will be agreed upon prior to commencement of work. Greenburg Road Apartments Subcontractor shall perform ALL work as outlined by the Plans and Specs. Subcontractor is the sole supplier of equipment, materials, and labor to complete all improvements as drawn. Subcontractor acknowledges that he is the sole Demo, Clearing, Grading,Excavation, Utilities and Off-site Paving subcontractor for the public improvements and it is the intention of the Subcontractor and Contractor that all aspects of Demo, Clearing, Grading,Excavation, Paving, Utilities improvements are included, without"gaps"or omissions. Contract is lump sum and quantities listed on proposal are for subcontractor's reference. Subcontractor understands and is fully aware of the"City of Tigard and Washington County Design Standards Manual." Subcontractor shall review details of the improvement drawings with those found in the manuals. Subcontractor shall submit request for clarifications where conflicts exist and shall verify standards with Public Works Inspector prior to constructing improvements. Excavation II Scope of Work Ca vex 5/25/2016 Scope Page 10 of 11 > Subcontractor asserts that he is qualified to construct public improvements within the City of Tigard and Washington County, shall be bondable for the subject improvements,and shall retain good standing throughout the duration of improvements. ➢ Subcontractor has visited the site and assumes as-is conditions for origination of work. Subcontractor shall keep area free of debris and trash until improvements have been completed. Subcontractor shall design,submit, and implement all traffic control measures necessary to complete this work. ➢ Subcontractor acknowledges that Contractor and other subcontractors will need to have continuous access to all portions of the site,facilitating the construction of the multi-family housing development. This access shall be established within 15 days from start of work and the Subcontractor shall maintain access roads until permanent paving is in place and the owner has accepted improvements. > Subcontractor shall maintain all of the public right of way in full compliance of all erosion control ordinances enforced by the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services throughout the duration of the construction period. ➢ Subcontractor shall supply and install a complete dry utility conduit system for Portland General Electric,Communications,Fire Alarm and Comcast Cable. This to include,but no be limited to: excavation,backfill, conduits, vaults,junction boxes,pulls string,and as-builds of installation. Subcontractor shall supply and install sleeves under hard surfaces for the electrical subcontractor, low-voltage fire alarm subcontractor, and low-voltage sprinkler system subcontractor under all paved surfaces. Subcontractor shall coordinate all inspections with appropriate franchised utilities and jurisdictions of authority. ➢ Subcontractor shall make all necessary adjustments, repairs,and corrections necessary to receive fmal approval of Public Improvements in accordance with Contractors schedule. Subcontractor shall also perform repairs for all warranty items identified by Public Works Engineering inspector for a period of 1 year from time of acceptance. GENERAL NOTES AND CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT 1. Contractor agrees that it will make every effort to have temporary power available, however,if power is not available at the time the Subcontractor begins work,the Subcontractor will provide his own means of temporary power until such time as the Contractor can arrange power. 2. Subcontractor is solely responsible for all materials and equipment left on site. Subcontractor is responsible for supplying and stocking material in a manner that Excavation II Scope of Work Greenberg 5252016 Scope Page 11 of 11 does not comprise the structural or cosmetic integrity of any completed improvements. 3. Subcontractor to protect all existing, neighboring properties (including automobiles) and assumes sole responsibility for all damages to neighboring properties stemming from Subcontractor's and sub-subcontractor's employees,equipment,or materials. Subcontractor shall protect all finish work from damage by others and the work of others from damage by this work. 4. Subcontractor shall provide all traffic control required necessary for completing the Subcontractor's scope of work. Traffic control,parking,parking fees, staging of trucks, street use fees,permits,barricades, flag men,etc. shall be provided by the Subcontractor. 5. Subcontractor shall be responsible for cleaning up all phases of this scope. Subcontractor shall remove all excess material, sand,bags,debris etc. immediately upon completion of each day's activities. The Subcontractor shall remove all material debris and packaging that is brought to the site by the Subcontractor from the site. Contractor does not provide a waste dumpster for Subcontractor's use. Subcontractor shall restore all finish surfaces including drywall or other material. Excavation II Scope of Work Greenburg 5252016 Landscape Scope of work for Greenburg Road Apartments The Subcontractor shall furnish all labor,materials,equipment,services and competent supervision incidental thereto necessary and required to perform all Landscaping.Irrigation,work for the aforementioned project according to approved plans and specifications also to include the following: This contract specifically includes,but is not limited to,the following items of work, Subcontractor will provide material and labor necessary to install all Landscaping,Irrigation,for the above mentioned project. This shall include,but not be limited to,all soil amendments,fel tilizers,topsoil,a complete irrigation system with clocks, backflow devices,plants,shrubs,trees,lawns,rock,ground cover,start-up maintenance, Subcontractor acknowledges that he is the sole landscaping and irrigation subcontractor and it is the intention of the Subcontractor and Contractor that all aspects of landscaping and irrigation are included,without"gaps"or omissions. Subcontractor acknowledges that the all quantities of the following site amenities will be installed by the Subcontractor: Contract is lump sum. This subcontract shall supersede all language in Subcontractor's proposal where conflicts existing. Subcontractor shall submit all submittals to Architect and Contractor for approval prior to procurement of materials. Submittals to include but not be limited to: - Irrigation Engineering and Plans,if different than approved plans - Irrigation pipe,heads,drips,valves,clocks,wiring,etc. - Plant Material - Tree Material - Lawn Material - Rock and Ground Cover - Soil Mix and Soil Amendments CONSULTING AND COORDINATION Subcontractor shall coordinate with Contractor's Superintendent,governing authorities,consultants,all other trades,including but not limited to: 1. City,State,and Federal Codes pertaining to scope—Subcontractor shall be licensed and qualified by all levels of jurisdiction for construction of improvements associated with this scope. Subcontractor shall design,make application for and secure all accessory permits required to complete scope including,but not limited to;traffic control,night work,hauling,street lighting etc. Subcontractor is responsible for all testing and final approval of underground wet utilities regardless of connections previously made by other trades. 2. OHSA—Subcontractor shall complete all aspects of this scope in strict accordance with OHSA standards and regulations. Contractor reserves the right to terminate this contract based upon repeated violations. 3. Architect,Civil Engineer,Surveyor,and Special Inspections—Subcontractor shall thoroughly review plans prior to commencing work and request clarification in writing of potential conflicts. Subcontractors to verify survey is in accordance with the approved plans and notify the Contractor of any discrepancies in writing. Subcontractor shall work directly with professional consultants to the extent required to complete and accurately document construction of improvements. Subcontractor is responsible for restoring or establishing all compaction requirements as specified by the special inspector/soils engineer. Subcontractor has been provided a soils report for the site and assumes work will be constructed in conditions as they are documented. 4. Coordination of Soils Placement with Contractor—Subcontractor shall place trench spoils in accordance with the Contractor's approval. Subcontractor will be responsible for all spoils until final placement in approved location. Subcontractor is responsible for the protection,repair,and final placement of all improvements exposed at the surface. Subcontractor shall be responsible for establishing all final grades to certified grading plan and hydrology approval to include,but not be limited to,handling of soils,import,export,stockpiling,and dust and erosion prevention. Landscape Scope of work for Greenburg Road Apartments 5. Plumbing and Electrical Subcontractor—Subcontractor shall coordinate within 15 days of accepting this contract with the plumber and electrician identifying all areas that water service(for irrigation)and electrical service(for irrigation clocks)is required. Subcontractor is responsible for all providing and installing all sleeving related to this scope of work. 6. Landscape Maintenance Company/Warranty—Subcontractor shall complete and maintain all in-place landscaping until the project is finished completely. At the time of final completion,the Subcontractor shall coordinate a walk-through with the Operations Landscape Maintenance Company(to be selected at a future date) and address all concerns that the Contractor and Owner have in regards to the complete project. The Subcontractor shall warranty all improvements,including trees,plants,shrubs,for a period of one year from the time of project completion. PREPARATION > Prior to beginning any portion of this scope of work the Subcontractor shall examine all areas and conditions to receive the work and will notify the Contractor in writing of any discrepancies,errors,and deficiencies prior to the commencement of this work.Subcontractor has reviewed the soils volume plan and the Urban Forestry Manual.If Subcontractor proceeds and places material over unsuitable surfaces,Subcontractor shall,at his own expense do any and all corrective work to complete the finish installation in a proper manner. Subcontractor shall verify that all inspections of work being covered have been approved prior to landscaping. > Subcontractor shall provide all topsoil,soils amendments,drain rock,fabric,and final prep prior to landscaping. Subcontractor shall ensure that all grades are left below building foundations per plans and specifications to avoid moisture damage to the wood framed structures. > Subcontractor shall provide and install all underground sleeving for irrigation pipe and wiring prior to installation of any hardscape. Subcontractor shall be responsible for all boring,if necessary,once hardscape is installed. Subcontractor shall protect all hard surfaces during installation of landscape. Subcontractor shall replace all hard surfaces or other improvements damaged by Subcontractor directly. ➢ Subcontractor shall perform all erosion control methods and means required by county,state,and federal regulations while performing the scope of this contract. Subcontractor shall comply with all request made by the jurisdiction of authority as it pertains to erosion and dust control. Subcontractor shall properly and effectively cap the site daily in a manner that eliminates after-hours violations. An approved erosion control plan shall serve only as a benchmark and the subcontractor shall exceed means and methods implied on the approved erosion control plan to a level acceptable to the building department and city at which you are working in. Subcontractor shall create and maintain all required site documentation as a portion of providing erosion control. Contractor will provide one on-site water source. Subcontractor is responsible for the transfer and distribution of water across site. IRRIGATION > Subcontractor shall supply and install a complete programmable automatic sprinkler irrigation system. System shall ensure that all areas of landscaping requiring water are adequately served per the Irrigation drawings.Subcontractor will be supplied one power supply location and one irrigation water service location unless additional locations are agreed upon. Subcontractor shall supply backflow prevention devices at all irrigation taps and be responsible for the initial testing of each device.Subcontractor shall obtain backflow prevention permit,and will be responsible for its approved inspection.All wiring,per code,is the responsibility of the Subcontractor. Subcontractor shall provide a one time training session with the owner's representative on the operation of the system. Subcontractor shall warranty system for a period of one-year and add additional heads if required due to lack of coverage. Subcontractor shall submit as-built drawings to the General Contractor prior to final billing.All trenching,boring is the responsibility of the Subcontractor require for installation. Subcontractor shall protect all wiring and irrigation stubs. Subcontractor shall coordinate with plumber on irrigation supply locations. ➢ Subcontractor shall regularly monitor irrigation system to ensure that irrigation is not directed at any buildings or sidewalk surfaces. Subcontractor shall certify proper operation of irrigation system and heads at the time of delivery to the landscape maintenance company. PLANTINGS > Subcontractor shall install all plantings,trees,shrubs,ground cover,and lawns per plans and specifications. Subcontractor shall install all plants using methods and materials as shown on the approved set of plans of per supplier's recommendations. Subcontractor shall also include all elements regarding the survivability of plantings such Landscape Scope of work for Greenburg Road Apartments as root barriers,guide-wires,etc. Subcontractor shall warranty all plants and trees for a period of one year from the time of project completion and shall replace all dead plants and trees at the sole cost of the subcontractor. GROUND COVER,ROCK,DECORATIVE ROCK > Subcontractor shall supply and place all rock and ground cover necessary to complete all landscape areas. Subcontractor shall include all borders that eliminate the contamination of different rock with:other rock types,lawns, and sidewalks. CLEAN-UI' ➢ Subcontractor shall perform clean-up operations at the end of every working day. This shall include removing soils from hardscape areas,tidying up stockpiles,removing all packaging debris from the site,and performing all dust prevention methods to minimize after-hour violations. The Subcontractor shall be responsible for removing all debris and waste generated by this scope from the job site. ➢ After each area of landscaping is completed,the Subcontractor shall sweep all sidewalks and parking areas that were contaminated by the Subcontractor's scope of work. At the Contractor's request the Subcontractor shall power wash/clean areas stained by Subcontractor's scope. Subcontractor shall protect all new landscaped areas and lawn with flagging barriers. > Subcontractor acknowledges that all work that has been rejected shall be remedied or removed and replaced by subcontractor in an acceptable manner and no compensation shall be allowed for such removals or replacements. GENERAL NOTES AND CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT 1. Subcontractor is solely responsible for all materials and equipment left on site. Subcontractor is responsible for supplying and stocking material in a manner that does not comprise the structural or cosmetic integrity of any completed improvements. 2. Subcontractor to protect all existing,neighboring properties(including automobiles)and assumes sole responsibility for all damages to neighboring properties stemming from Subcontractor's and sub-subcontractor's employees,equipment, or materials. Subcontractor shall protect all finish work from damage by others and the work of others from damage by this work. 3. Subcontractor shall provide all traffic control required necessary for completing the Subcontractor's scope of work. Traffic control,parking,parking fees,staging of trucks,street use fees,permits,barricades,flag men,etc.shall be provided by the Subcontractor. 4. Subcontractor shall be responsible for cleaning up all phases of this scope. Subcontractor shall remove all excess material,sand,bags,debris etc.immediately upon completion of each day's activities. All material debris and packaging that is brought to the site by the Subcontractor shall be placed in the Contractor provided waste dumpster. Subcontractor shall restore all finish surfaces including drywall or other. 5. Subcontractor shall be responsible for anything,to include but not limited to,damage caused by its employees or agents. If such Work is damaged by the Subcontractor, its employees or agents, repairs shall be at the sole expense of the Subcontractor. Subcontractor is responsible to protect all countertops, bathtubs, sinks, toilets,walls,carpets,flooring,windows,etc. Any damaged caused by Subcontractor shall be repaired at the Subcontractor's expense. Subcontractor will fully protect the Work and the Work of others and all portions and components thereof,including the materials, until all of the Work is fully completed and accepted by the Contractor. The Subcontractor is responsible for broom sweeping all Work areas and the unit(s),removal of all food,trash, scraps and construction debris and excess material of its craft daily. In the event that the Subcontractor fails to do this,the Contractor shall have the right to remove all such trash,scraps,construction debris and excess material at the Subcontractor's sole expense. Subcontractor will notify Contractor's Superintendent if a unit has not been leaned prior to Subcontractor's commencement of their Work. If Subcontractor starts the Work in a unit which has not been cleaned,Subcontractor shall clean the unit at its own expense. Contractor shall backcharge all expenses to include,but not limited to,temporary labor at the rate of three(3)times the cost. Subcontractor acknowledges such Landscape Scope of work for Greenburg Road Apartments backcharges are reasonable approximation of Contractor's additional actual and administrative expenses of cleaning and are not a penalty BUILDING PERMIT RESUBMITTAL CASE # SDR2014-00002 GREENBURG APARTMENTS Date: 2/3/16 To: City of Tigard Al Dickman From: Evergreen Builders Daryl Retzlaff RE: Building Permits Al, Please find the following plan sheets to insert into the plans that have already been submitted. C1.0: Cover sheet including PGE transformer locations. C2.1: Site plan including PGE transformer locations and Construction note 25 noting proposed locations. C2.3:Utility plan showing proposed PGE transformer locations and utility note 20 noting proposed locations. L1.0: Landscape plan showing PGE transformer locations and screening. I have also included a set of landscape drawing to forward to Gary. LARGE PLANS FOR THIS FILE ARE IN THE RECORDS ROOM lig TIGARD City of Tigard April 7,2022 Daryl Retzlaff Project Manager Evergreen Builders 7420 SW Hunziker Road Suite A Tigard, Or 97223 RE: Landscaping Performance Bond No. B1205857 for Greenburg Road Apartments, Case File No. SDR2014-00002. Dear Mr. Retzlaff: As evidenced in the April 6, 2022 Memo from Clark Land Design, the terms of the Greenburg Road Apartments Site Development Review (SDR2014-00002) Landscaping Performance Bond, No. B1205857, in the amount of$11,907.00, have been met. Therefore, the City of Tigard releases the bond in full. If you have any questions,please call me at 503-718-2434. Regards, c.,._,LY/3 72,..:5t-..d.„ - , Gary Pagenstecher,AICP CUD Project Planner City of Tigard 503-718-2434 garypntigard-or.gov 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov